Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-10 Thread Anoop K
Yes, we do that. On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 2/10/2013 9:55 PM, Anoop K wrote: > > We analyzed the application side. It doesn't seem to be create a > transaction and keep it open. StackTraces indicate that it is BLOCKED in > JDBC openConne

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-10 Thread Anoop K
AM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:28 AM, Anoop K wrote: > > We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to > go to > > dead lock state for ever. On debugging the issue we found that > > 3 connections are going in to some dead lock

[GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-10 Thread Anoop K
We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to go to dead lock state* for ever*. On debugging the issue we found that 3 connections are going in to some dead lock state. 1. *idle in transaction * 2. *REINDEX waiting * 3. *SELECT waiting* All these connecti

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
REINDEX was for the whole database. It seems REINDEX was blocked by the <*idle in transaction*> process. What we are not able to explain is how that connection went in to <*idle in transaction*> state. The app stacktrace confirms that app (JDBC) is trying to open a connection. We do close connecti

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
Feb 6, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Anoop K wrote: > > We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to > go to > > dead lock state for ever. On debugging the issue we found that > > 3 connections are going in to some dead lock state. > > > > idle in tra

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
database and troubleshoot from there > first. Not being able to connect to your db because you ran out of > superuser connections is a bad thing. > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Anoop K wrote: > > Actually some of our processes connect as superuser. So even that is over > >

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
Actually some of our processes connect as superuser. So even that is over and is in hung state. On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote: > So have you tried connecting as a superuser? > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Anoop K wrote: > > We did run out of conns a

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
I dont have C triggers. I can attach gdb and get stacktrace. Wondering if it will take the processes out of problem state. Thanks Anoop On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Anoop K wrote: > > I have the setup in problem state. But

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
s. Have you tried > connecting as postgres? It has 2 or 3 superuser connections reserved > by default. > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:38 AM, Anoop K wrote: > > I have the setup in problem state. But I am not able to make psql > > connections to view the lock details. > >

Re: [GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-07 Thread Anoop K
urenz wrote: > Anoop K wrote: > > We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to > go to dead lock state for ever. > > On debugging the issue we found that > > 3 connections are going in to some dead lock state. > > > > 1.idle in tr

[GENERAL] REINDEX deadlock - Postgresql -9.1

2013-02-06 Thread Anoop K
We are hitting a situation where REINDEX is resulting in postgresql to go to dead lock state* for ever*. On debugging the issue we found that 3 connections are going in to some dead lock state. 1. *idle in transaction * 2. *REINDEX waiting * 3. *SELECT waiting* All these connecti