Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Milligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> FWIW, I've used the exact same code against PG 8.2.6 and have half a >> dozen similar transactions that inserted more than 13.5 million rows, >> with the largest transaction at a little over 25 million rows inserted >> into the email table. > > Hmph. That seems to eliminate the overflow theory, because 8.2 has > essentially the same lock-counting code as 8.3. Unless 8.3 is taking > out the lock a heckuva lot more than 8.2 did, but I can't think of a > reason for that to happen. > > Now that we know you can reproduce it, we should think about how to get > some information out. Are you in a position to build a locally modified > Postgres? I could send you a patch to make that particular error report > dump out more information about the lock state, but a patch won't do you > any good if you aren't able to build from source.
I can rebuild with a patch, sure. I've got a spare machine I can mirror the db over to (same hardware) to debug this. Regards, Mike -- Michael Milligan -> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
