Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
- From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
- To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: "Dorochevsky,Michel" <michel(dot)dorochevsky(at)softcon(dot)de>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:31:06 +0100
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm still not very sure why you're hitting the problem more often than other people. There might be some tweak you could make in your application code to dodge the issue.
The initial size of the local lock hash table is 128. That's a lot of locks, most applications probably don't use that many locks and therefore avoid the issue.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
- References:
- Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
- From: Dorochevsky,Michel
- Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
- Prev by Date: Re: BUG #3256: msi installer failed to upgrade to newer version
- Next by Date: PGSQL - WARNING: 25P01: there is no transaction in progress
- Previous by thread: Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object
- Next by thread: Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock ob ject
- Indexes: