Tom Lane wrote: > [ reincluding the mailing list ] > > Michael Milligan <mi...@acmeps.com> writes: > > Okay, it reproduces and surprise surprise nLocks does overflow... > > > ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16385/16467/0 is already held > > lock(0x87408a028) id(16385,16467,0,0,0,1) grantMask(a) waitMask(0) > > req(2,0,1,0,0,0,0,0)=3 grant(1,0,1,0,0,0,0,0)=2 wait(0) > > proclock(0x8743a7508) lock(0x87408a028) method(1) proc(0x8743aada8) hold(a) > > locallock(0xb29c78) nLocks(-2147483648) nOwners(2) mOwners(8) > > Hah. Okay, that shows that we'd never have reproduced it with a small > test case.
This hasn't been fixed yet, has it? Do you have any ideas on how to actually fix the problem? I wonder if it looks like enlarging nLocks, or you're intending to attempt to reduce the number of locks taken. A customer of ours started hitting this bug too, last week. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
