From: Brad Nicholson <bnichols@ca.afilias.info>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: locking issue on simple selects?
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:32:56 -0400
Message-ID: <4C911F68.6020507@ca.afilias.info> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikzssP3AKeQhM+tB_8tScRGs2iGSqTJJUg2w3DP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikh++7mouBb7cr2C9zMPKtRffVxDK0QFTf16HLo@mail.gmail.com>
<4096.1284557987@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<AANLkTikzssP3AKeQhM+tB_8tScRGs2iGSqTJJUg2w3DP@mail.gmail.com>
On 10-09-15 03:07 PM, Tobias Brox wrote:
> On 15 September 2010 15:39, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> An exclusive lock will block selects too. Have you looked into pg_locks
>> for ungranted lock requests?
> Well - I thought so, we have a logging script that logs the content of
> the pg_locks table, it didn't log anything interesting but it may be a
> problem with the script itself. It does an inner join on
> pg_locks.relation = pg_class.oid but when I check now this join seems
> to remove most of the rows in the pg_locks table. Does it make sense
> at all to join pg_class with pg_locks? I will ask the sysadm to
> change to an outer join as for now.
>
You can also enable log_lock_waits and the lock waits will appear in
your Postgres logs.
--
Brad Nicholson 416-673-4106
Database Administrator, Afilias Canada Corp.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: bnichols@ca.afilias.info
Subject: Re: locking issue on simple selects?
In-Reply-To: <4C911F68.6020507@ca.afilias.info>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox