> Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> How can I check it? > >> > >> The 'stuck' message should at least give you a code location... > > > FATAL: s_lock(0x2ac2d016) at spin.c:158, stuck spinlock. Aborting. > > Hmm, that's SpinAcquire, so it's one of the predefined spinlocks > (and not, say, a buffer spinlock). You could try adding some > debug logging here, although the output would be voluminous. > But what would really be useful is a stack trace for the stuck > process. Consider changing the s_lock code to abort() when it > gets a stuck spinlock --- then you could gdb the coredump. Nice idea. I will try that. -- Tatsuo Ishii ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
- [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tatsuo Ishii
- Re: [HACKERS] stuck spin lock with many concurrent users Tom Lane