> >
> > Why cant postgres get the RowExclusiveLock in transaction 3369000?
>
> Probably because the ExclusiveLock'ers are waiting in front
> of RowExclusiveLock. Locks are granted in order.
>
> It would help if you didn't mangle the pg_locks output so badly.
Yes, sorry about that.
I was abl
> > Anyways, i am trying to avoid locks now, by using my own merge
> > function to avoid update/insert race condition.
> >
> > Or what is the suggested way to avoid the update/insert
> race condition?.
>
> What update/insert race condition? Maybe you are talking
> about the subject of example
Dietmar Maurer wrote:
> > > Anyways, i am trying to avoid locks now, by using my own merge
> > > function to avoid update/insert race condition.
> > >
> > > Or what is the suggested way to avoid the update/insert
> > race condition?.
> >
> > What update/insert race condition? Maybe you are tal
Dietmar Maurer wrote:
> > >
> > > Why cant postgres get the RowExclusiveLock in transaction 3369000?
> >
> > Probably because the ExclusiveLock'ers are waiting in front
> > of RowExclusiveLock. Locks are granted in order.
> >
> > It would help if you didn't mangle the pg_locks output so badly
Dietmar Maurer wrote:
> The pg_locks table shows the following:
>
> > SELECT pg_class.relname AS table, transaction, pid, mode, granted FROM
> pg_locks, pg_class, pg_database WHERE pg_locks.relation = pg_class.oid
> AND pg_locks.database = pg_database.oid;
>
> pg_class33
Hi all,
recently our application was locked, and postgres shows several
processes in "LOCK TABLE waiting" state. Even the autovacuum process is
stalled.
The pg_locks table shows the following:
> SELECT pg_class.relname AS table, transaction, pid, mode, granted FROM
pg_locks, pg_class, pg_databas
