Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([2a02:16a8:dc51::56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fueJY-0001H1-Qu for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:45:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fueJX-0005kq-4v for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:45:47 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fueJW-0005ki-U5 for pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:45:46 +0000 Received: from n3.nabble.com ([162.255.23.22]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fueJT-0003Ij-Pu for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:45:46 +0000 Received: from n3.nabble.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n3.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7256EEC92C68 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 06:45:42 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 06:45:42 -0700 (MST) From: pavan95 To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Message-ID: <1535463942466-0.post@n3.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <2be8ebca-fecc-51f4-39d7-9869941c679a@posteo.de> References: <986488f7-ff29-5dff-9425-5fcd6dcbb68a@posteo.de> <1378566276.366027624.1535454005687.JavaMail.root@zimbra82-e14.priv.proxad.net> <99342cd8-c2f6-31bd-f8e4-5c65658b1a2f@posteo.de> <1233975696.366149748.1535454938944.JavaMail.root@zimbra82-e14.priv.proxad.net> <114865725.367018989.1535461805284.JavaMail.root@zimbra82-e14.priv.proxad.net> <2be8ebca-fecc-51f4-39d7-9869941c679a@posteo.de> Subject: Re: tuple concurrently updated MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Hi Walter, Why can't you go with a postgres service restart in order to get rid of this error? >DELETE FROM planet_osm_line WHERE osm_id = -166570; >FEHLER: tuple concurrently updated Concurrent transactions can update or delete one or more of those rows before DELETE can lock the rows (at least with the default isolation level READ COMMITTED). This would result in your error message. To defend against this race condition, lock the rows in the SELECT with FOR UPDATE (or other options) Regards, Pavan -- Sent from: http://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-admin-f2076596.html