From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "John Smith" <sodgodofall(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Recovery failed on a backup with " lock AccessShareLock on object 16477/244169/0 is already held" |
Date: | 2008-06-30 19:26:40 |
Message-ID: | 3602.1214854000@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"John Smith" <sodgodofall(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2008-06-17 23:53:53.206 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual
> page PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
> 2008-06-17 23:53:53.207 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual
> page STATEMENT: commit prepared '148969' ;
> I believe this panic is probably bug #3245 based on the description of
> that bug - http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-04/msg00075.php
Yeah, looks like it to me too.
> At this point I attempted to do a recovery using the continuous
> archive backup on the warm standby system. Instead of recovering
> correctly it encountered this FATAL error where a AccessSharedLock was
> already held.
> 2008-06-18 00:05:34.298 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual
> page FATAL: lock AccessShareLock on object 16477/244169/0 is already
> held
> 2008-06-18 00:05:34.299 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual
> page LOG: startup process (PID 17377) exited with exit code 1
> 2008-06-18 00:05:34.299 Local time zone must be set--see zic manual
> page LOG: aborting startup due to startup process failure
> Is this FATAL error seen on recovery a different bug or is it just a
> direct result of bug #3245?
It probably is the same bug. The underlying cause of that bug is
explained here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2007-04/msg00129.php
I think what you are seeing is just a variant case caused by the same
lock being written out to the twophase file twice. In any case there's
probably little point in digging further until you've updated to a
version with that fix --- if you still see the problem afterward,
we can look closer.
BTW, what's with the bizarre "Local time zone must be set--see zic
manual" where the timezone should be? Are you intentionally selecting
the "Factory" zone?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Smith | 2008-06-30 22:35:42 | Re: Recovery failed on a backup with " lock AccessShareLock on object 16477/244169/0 is already held" |
Previous Message | John Smith | 2008-06-30 17:40:03 | Recovery failed on a backup with " lock AccessShareLock on object 16477/244169/0 is already held" |