| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: finding the other statement causing a sharelock |
| Date: | 2010-11-08 21:22:16 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinfQ8Ht4t0DZvSxun=0sGBi+CUgocHh=bqi9u8M@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
<mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it> wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:45:12 -0500
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail(at)webthatworks(dot)it> writes:
>> > I get
>> > DETAIL: Process 24749 waits for ShareLock on transaction
>> > 113443492; blocked by process 25199. Process 25199 waits for
>> > ShareLock on transaction 113442820; blocked by process 24749.
>>
>> > I would like to know both statements that caused the sharelock
>> > problem.
>
>> Recent versions of PG record both (or all) statements involved in a
>> deadlock in the postmaster log.
>
Don't know how much it helps here, but this page:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Lock_Monitoring
is priceless when you're having issues midday with a lock that won't go away.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2010-11-08 21:26:04 | Re: temporary table as a subset of an existing table and indexes |
| Previous Message | Ivan Sergio Borgonovo | 2010-11-08 21:18:42 | Re: finding the other statement causing a sharelock |