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.
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 |