From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | sireesha <sireesha(dot)padmini(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Mutex error 22 - Postgres version 14 |
Date: | 2023-02-02 00:14:21 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzkG-yixQvpnJHE63Gx9yebo8vQFD=Hm1__C_fA_D0iscg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 3:02 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > 2023-01-24 02:35:45.833 PST [3424807] LOG: PID 0 in cancel request did not
> > match any process
> > *Error locking mutex 22*
>
> The first of those lines comes from this bit in postmaster.c:
>
> /* No matching backend */
> ereport(LOG,
> (errmsg("PID %d in cancel request did not match any process",
> backendPID)));
>
> As you can see, that would not have generated anything about a mutex.
> The string "locking mutex" appears nowhere in the Postgres sources;
> in fact, so far as I can find we don't use the word "mutex" in any
> message whatever.
I wonder if 22 might be EINVAL, which is one possible error code used
by pthread_mutex_lock().
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-02-02 00:18:55 | Re: Mutex error 22 - Postgres version 14 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-02-01 23:02:36 | Re: Mutex error 22 - Postgres version 14 |