| From: | "Michael P(dot) Soulier" <michael_soulier(at)mitel(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: apparent deadlock | 
| Date: | 2008-11-18 21:29:49 | 
| Message-ID: | 20081118212949.GA21436@e-smith.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
On 18/11/08 Scott Marlowe did say:
> Just because you've got a blocking transaction doesn't mean it's a
> deadlock.  A deadlock means you have two transactions, each of which
> is waiting for the other to continue before it can go on.  If one
> query is holding up another query, but not vice versa, it's not a
> deadlock, just a lock.
Right you are.
> First place to start is the view pg_locks
I found this:
http://fishbowl.pastiche.org/2004/02/26/finding_open_locks_on_postgresql/
it revealed where the locks were consumed.
Thanks,
Mike
-- 
Michael P. Soulier <michael_soulier(at)mitel(dot)com>, 613-592-2122 x2522
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a
touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."
--Albert Einstein
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2008-11-18 21:57:53 | New shapshot RPMs (Nov 18, 2008) are ready for testing | 
| Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2008-11-18 21:04:45 | Re: MVCC and index-only read |