On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On 2013-11-24 16:56:26 -0500, J Smith wrote: > >> Nov 23 14:38:32 dev postgres[23810]: [4-1] user=dev,db=dev ERROR: could not >> access status of transaction 13514992 >> Nov 23 14:38:32 dev postgres[23810]: [4-2] user=dev,db=dev DETAIL: Could >> not open file "pg_subtrans/00CE": Success. >> Nov 23 14:38:32 dev postgres[23810]: [4-3] user=dev,db=dev CONTEXT: SQL >> statement "SELECT 1 FROM ONLY "dev"."collection_batches" x WHERE "id" >> OPERATOR(pg_catalog.=) $1 FOR KEY SHARE OF x" > > > Ok, this is helpful. Do you rather longrunning transactions? The > transaction that does foreign key checks has an xid of 10260613, while > the row that's getting checked has 13514992.
We did have some long-running transactions, yes. We refactored a bit and removed them and the problem ceased on our end. We ended up reverting our changes for the sake of running this experiment over the weekend and the errors returned. We've since restored our fix and haven't had any problems since, so yeah, long-running transactions appear to be involved. We can continue to experiment if you have any additional tests you'd like us to run. We may have to keep the experiments to running over the weekend, but they're definitely do-able. Cheers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
