Re: BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock ob ject
Von: Tom Lane [mailto:...]
Gesendet: Freitag, 20. April 2007 18:14
An: Dorochevsky,Michel
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Betreff: Re: AW: [BUGS] BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock
object
"Dorochevsky,Michel" <michel (dot) dorochevsky (at) softcon (dot) de>
writes:
Two runs of the same test program fail at different places, so it seems
to
be dependent of the timing. Two log files are available at
www.dorochevsky.de/infos/postgresql-2007-04-20_145638.zip
www.dorochevsky.de/infos/postgresql-2007-04-20_144006.zipHm, could you try again with log_line_prefix set to '%m %p ' rather than
just %t? It's too hard to guess which messages are coming from which
backend ...regards, tom lane
Took me a number of tries, here it is
www.dorochevsky.de/infos/pg_log-2007-04-21_1811.zip
Best Regards
-- Michel
Question: do you have any leftover files in $PGDATA/pg_twophase ?
I'm wondering why the log contains no warning messages about stale
two-phase state files. It looks to me like the system should have
found the two-phase file still there upon restart, but the transaction
should have been marked already committed.
BTW, can you tell whether the failing transactions actually were committed
--- are their effects still visible in the database?regards, tom lane