From: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #12469: pg_locks shows locks held by pids not found i n pg_stat_activity or ps |
Date: | 2015-01-09 18:31:46 |
Message-ID: | 20150109123146.600a392c@slate.meme.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 18:07:35 +0000 (UTC)
Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> wrote:
> "kop(at)meme(dot)com" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > I found that after running a large transaction (for days, it's still
> > running) and then running out of shared memory that pg_locks
> > reports locks held by pids that do not seem to exist, either in ps
> > output or in pg_stat_activity.
>
> That is not a bug. For details see either of the below links:
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blob;f=src/backend/storage/lmgr/README-SSI;hb=master
>
> http://vldb.org/pvldb/vol5/p1850_danrkports_vldb2012.pdf
>
> The short explanation is that SIReadLocks on a serializable
> transaction may need to be kept until overlapping transactions
> terminate.
Ok. Thanks.
The transactions/locks are in separate databases. I would think
that in most cases that a
transaction in one database cannot have any effect on a
transaction in another database.
It would be nice if pg were clever enough to isolate transactions
within databases.
Regards,
Karl <kop(at)meme(dot)com>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2015-01-09 18:38:36 | Re: BUG #12469: pg_locks shows locks held by pids not found i n pg_stat_activity or ps |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2015-01-09 18:19:48 | Re: BUG #9923: "reassign owned" does not change permissions grantor |