On 24/01/14 10:09, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Mark Kirkwood
<mark.kirkw...@catalyst.net.nz> wrote:
On 24/01/14 09:49, Tom Lane wrote:
2. What have you got that is requesting exclusive lock on pg_attribute?
That seems like a pretty unfriendly behavior in itself. regards, tom lane
I've seen this sort of problem where every db session was busily creating
temporary tables. I never got to the find *why* they needed to make so many,
but it seemed like a bad idea.
But... how does that result on a vacuum-incompatible lock request
against pg_attribute?
I see that it'll insert lots of rows into pg_attribute, and maybe
later delete them, but none of that blocks vacuum.
That was my thought too - if I see it happening again here (was a year
or so ago that I saw some serious pg_attribute bloat) I'll dig deeper.
regards
Mark
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
