On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Gavin M. Roy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > 2008-03-04 05:45:47 EST [6698]: [1-1] LOG: process 6698 still waiting > for > > AccessShareLock on relation 1247 of database 16385 after 1001.519 ms > > 2008-03-04 05:45:47 EST [6698]: [2-1] STATEMENT: VACUUM FULL > > autograph.autograph_creators > > 2008-03-04 05:46:28 EST [6730]: [1-1] LOG: process 6730 still waiting > for > > AccessShareLock on relation 1247 of database 16385 after 1000.887 ms > > 2008-03-04 05:46:28 EST [6730]: [2-1] STATEMENT: VACUUM FULL > > lunchmoney.totals > > 2008-03-04 05:47:55 EST [3809]: [18-1] LOG: server process (PID 6742) > was > > terminated by signal 6: Aborted > > 2008-03-04 05:47:55 EST [3809]: [19-1] LOG: terminating any other > active > > server processes > > 2008-03-04 05:47:55 EST [6741]: [12-1] WARNING: terminating connection > > because of crash of another server process > > How annoying ... the PANIC message doesn't seem to have reached the log. > elog.c is careful to fflush(stderr) before abort(), so that isn't > supposed to happen. But it looks like you are using syslog for logging > (correct?) so maybe this is a problem with the syslog implementation > you're using. What's the platform exactly? > > I wonder if it'd be reasonable to put a closelog() call just before > the abort() ... > > regards, tom lane >
The panic may have made it if this is what you were looking for: 2008-03-04 05:45:20 EST [6742]: [7-1] PANIC: deadlock detected 2008-03-04 05:58:33 EST [8751]: [3-1] PANIC: deadlock detected (it cored twice before I lowered the concurrency of vacuums)
