Sorry this is an extremely old thread, but I finally got around to
tracking down the problem.. Added these lines to postgres.conf and
poof, problem gone..
tcp_keepalives_idle = 60# TCP_KEEPIDLE, in seconds;
tcp_keepalives_interval = 10# TCP_KEEPINTVL, in seconds;
tcp_k
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:38, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 07/14/11 7:58 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
>
>>
>> There were 2519 RowExclusiveLock and 85 ExclusiveLock
>>
>
> how could 800 max_connections have 2519 row locks ? do you update multiple
> different rows in the same transaction?
>
>
the row locks
On 07/14/11 7:58 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
There were 2519 RowExclusiveLock and 85 ExclusiveLock
how could 800 max_connections have 2519 row locks ? do you update
multiple different rows in the same transaction?
--
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:42, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:05, Scott Marlowe
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 08:22, Scott Marlowe >
> >> > wrote:
>
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:05, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 08:22, Scott Marlowe
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
>> >> >
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 10:05, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 08:22, Scott Marlowe
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 01:13, Scott Marlowe >
> >> > wrote:
>
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 08:22, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 01:13, Scott Marlowe
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
>> >> >
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 08:22, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 01:13, Scott Marlowe
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:35, John R Pierce
> >> > wrote:
> >>
On 14/07/2011 10:05 PM, stefanu wrote:
I thought that the command line would be built properly (I mean the %r would
be replaced by the caller), but for some reason it is not happening.
I don't use hot standby on Windows, but since there's been no other
response to this I'll try to have a loo
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 01:13, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:35, John R Pierce
>> > wrote:
>> > It's a game server, and the queries are updating users' money, as
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 01:13, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:35, John R Pierce
> wrote:
> > It's a game server, and the queries are updating users' money, as normal.
> > The sql is like "UPDATE player SET money = money + 1
Hello all,
I am having a little trouble with a hot standby configuration on Windows,
and I was hoping I could find an answer here.
Everything works fine (both machines run just fine, and the hot standby
works like a charm), except for one problem. The pg_archivecleanup refuses
to run; it seems li
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Tony Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:35, John R Pierce wrote:
> It's a game server, and the queries are updating users' money, as normal.
> The sql is like "UPDATE player SET money = money + 100 where id = 12345".
> The locks were RowExclusiveLock for the
Thanks, I've checked the "for update". No such queries there.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 15:36, Radoslaw Smogura wrote:
> Once time I've read 9.x PostgreSQL locks everything before offset, if You
> execute select for update offset. Do you call such query at least once? It's
> the way why we think a
Thanks Jeff, that seems to have done it.
We are still evaluating the move to 8.4 and have no plans to move on to 9.x at
the moment but I'll keep those changes in mind.
cheers,
On 13 Jul 2011, at 19:33, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 18:10 +0100, Duarte Fonseca wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
Once time I've read 9.x PostgreSQL locks everything before offset, if You
execute select for update offset. Do you call such query at least once? It's
the way why we think about having 9.x server.
Regards,
Radoslaw Smogura
(mobile)
-Original Message-
From: Tony
On 07/13/2011 04:02 PM, Caleb Palmer wrote:
Hi all,
My company sells software that uses PostgreSQL and the need has come
up to provide a tool that gives our clients access to query the
database but we don't want to expect these users to be able to use
SQL. Is there a product out there that
17 matches
Mail list logo
