Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683DA633B70 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:27:30 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 95438-09 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 13:27:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-iw0-f178.google.com (mail-iw0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9519B63257E for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0400 (AST) Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so841138iwn.28 for ; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:27:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=SK59MYjIG8Ksf5W07oGmudZWAKBhnJOssOu6YVXb2B4=; b=SCPginc4ARj3W19RvIIzj5fXMxfnP05ZnHG1essqfHN6keG5NiE3MqW1jTJex6M6o8 qI3KvP8L/yPiu2QNz7yTVJb7gcb/AR90Ti0CUAQRosWAYgOTTOyjfOQfx6j9usjIPhbx kPjlmPl/MmQPIhi+viGMSxInZW6m3/JhpAFL8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=hUNZMjxGlZROjWHWQhQ3Ofw9B2JtEQ6tCw7PGe3/J/4llUNRZFJJNGamQ3yZtuEVPa tZarFPQS3qSoU9/uRweJqPj3Ipo4k4R5pPReWt2knDxsAcBU3fExjZiCa8VgQ4rArQTP LoIdpNkN0uh2dsN6SIpZPkKJ2hapG/kLZ60Cc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.147.199 with SMTP id m7mr192672ibv.87.1268141237537; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:27:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <919b7db61003090138j6da56dffu5e0ddd4276168b48@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 18:57:17 +0530 Message-ID: <919b7db61003090527k3c8ad4cw84b70e55bd15cd1e@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Out of shared memory in postgres 8.4.2 and locks From: Vidhya Bondre To: Merlin Moncure Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e647ecc4fd0aab04815e2378 X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.598 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201003/88 X-Sequence-Number: 37913 --0016e647ecc4fd0aab04815e2378 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Vidhya Bondre > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > We have installed postgres 8.4.2 on production. > > > > We have a parition table structure for one of the table. > > > > when i am drop the master table we get the following error. > > > > drop table table_name cascade; > > WARNING: out of shared memory > > ERROR: out of shared memory > > HINT: You might need to increase max_locks_per_transaction. > > > > FYI : This sql was working fine on Postgres 8.3 > > > > Can some one please let me know what is going wrong here. > > are you using the same postgresql.conf? have you created more > partitions? using advisory locks? > Yes we are using same conf files. In a week we create around 5 partitions. We are not using advisory locks > > In any event, increase the max_locks_per_transaction setting and > restart the database. > Currently the value of max_locks_per_transaction is 64 modifying it to 96 works. Have a couple of questions 1] As and when we add partitions will we have to increase this parameter ? 2] will we have to consider any othe parameter twick while increasing this one? > > merlin > --0016e647ecc4fd0aab04815e2378 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Merlin Moncure <= span dir=3D"ltr"><mmoncure@gmail.c= om> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Vidhya Bondre <meetvbondre@gmail.com> wrote:
&= gt; Hi All,
>
> We have=A0installed postgres 8.4.2 on productio= n.
>
> We have a parition table structure for one of the=A0table.
= >
> when=A0i am drop the master table we get the following error.<= br>>
> drop table=A0table_name cascade;
> WARNING:=A0 out of= shared memory
> ERROR:=A0 out of shared memory
> HINT:=A0 You might need to incr= ease max_locks_per_transaction.
>
> FYI : This sql was working = fine on Postgres 8.3
>
> Can some one please let me know what i= s going wrong here.

are you using the same postgresql.conf? =A0have you created= more
partitions? =A0using advisory locks?
Yes we are using same conf files. In a week we create around 5 partiti= ons. We are not using advisory locks

In any event, increase the m= ax_locks_per_transaction setting and
restart the database.
=A0
Currently the value of max_locks_per_transaction is 64 modifying it to= 96 works.
Have a couple of questions
1] As and when we add partitions will we have to increase this paramet= er ?
2] will we have to consider any othe parameter twick while increasing = this one?
=A0

merl= in

--0016e647ecc4fd0aab04815e2378--