Re: attempted to lock invisible tuple - PG 8.4.1

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Stuart Bishop <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net>
Cc: Alban Hertroys <dalroi(at)solfertje(dot)student(dot)utwente(dot)nl>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: attempted to lock invisible tuple - PG 8.4.1
Date: 2009-10-05 16:00:16
Message-ID: 20091005160016.GC5176@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Stuart Bishop wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Alban Hertroys
> <dalroi(at)solfertje(dot)student(dot)utwente(dot)nl> wrote:

> > A similar issue was discussed just recently here:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2009-09/msg01219.php
> >
> > That issue involved cursors though (and a serializable isolation level, but
> > you have that). Do you have any triggers that use cursors on the table that
> > the update fails for?
>
> There is a trigger on that table, and it is certainly the culprit as
> can be seen here (different table, same trigger):

I don't think the committed patch touches anything involved in what
you're testing, but if you could grab CVS tip from the 8.4 branch (or
the snapshot from ftp.postgresql.org:/pub/snapshot/stable/8.4 ) and give
it a try, that'd be great.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Raymond O'Donnell 2009-10-05 16:16:48 Looking for interest in an Irish PUG
Previous Message Joshua Berry 2009-10-05 15:04:06 Limiting the impact of schema additions/poor queries made by clients on production machines