I don't know the answer to your question. Please keep mailing list conversations on the list, otherwise you won't get the benefit of someone else who may know the answer. I do wonder what else is happening in the transaction that you're calling NOTIFY within; and that some other statement could be causing the lock wait. On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:53:56 +0400 Aln Kapa <alnkapa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I realized that my explanation of the problem is not accurate. I do > not understand what is happening and why process is waiting for > AccessExclusiveLock. > More logs: > -- > 682058674-2013-03-14 16:41:48 MSK web@web 8025 LOG: process 8025 > still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3000.114 ms > 682058826:2013-03-14 16:41:48 MSK web@web 8025 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test71, '' > 682058893-2013-03-14 16:41:48 MSK web@web 15984 LOG: duration: > 4017.622 ms statement: COMMIT > -- > 682059265-2013-03-14 16:41:48 MSK web@web 8025 LOG: process 8025 > acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of database 0 > after 3228.124 ms > 682059408:2013-03-14 16:41:48 MSK web@web 8025 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test71, '' > 682059475-2013-03-14 16:41:48 MSK web@web 8025 LOG: duration: > 3228.257 ms statement: NOTIFY test71, '' > -- > 816903276-2013-03-15 09:18:04 MSK web@web 11373 LOG: process 11373 > still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3000.129 ms > 816903430:2013-03-15 09:18:04 MSK web@web 11373 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test102, '' > 816903499-2013-03-15 09:18:05 MSK web@web 15984 LOG: duration: > 7075.972 ms statement: COMMIT > -- > 816903867-2013-03-15 09:18:05 MSK web@web 11373 LOG: process 11373 > acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of database 0 > after 3747.147 ms > 816904012:2013-03-15 09:18:05 MSK web@web 11373 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test102, '' > 816904081-2013-03-15 09:18:05 MSK web@web 11373 LOG: duration: > 3747.254 ms statement: NOTIFY test102, '' > -- > 817081702-2013-03-15 09:19:25 MSK web@web 11491 LOG: process 11491 > still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3000.117 ms > 817081856:2013-03-15 09:19:25 MSK web@web 11491 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test87, '' > 817081924-2013-03-15 09:19:25 MSK web@web 15984 LOG: duration: > 4004.117 ms statement: COMMIT > 817082009-2013-03-15 09:19:25 MSK web@web 11491 LOG: process 11491 > acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of database 0 > after 3141.744 ms > 817082154:2013-03-15 09:19:25 MSK web@web 11491 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test87, '' > 817082222-2013-03-15 09:19:25 MSK web@web 11491 LOG: duration: > 3164.606 ms statement: NOTIFY test87, '' > -- > 818804853-2013-03-15 09:38:02 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 11759 LOG: process > 11759 still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 > of database 0 after 3000.111 ms > 818805014:2013-03-15 09:38:02 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 11759 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test, '' > 818805087-2013-03-15 09:38:02 MSK web@web 15984 WARNING: > key:union_transport_stat_web75 > -- > 818831490-2013-03-15 09:38:03 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 11759 LOG: process > 11759 acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3960.587 ms > 818831642:2013-03-15 09:38:03 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 11759 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test, '' > 818831715-2013-03-15 09:38:03 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 11759 LOG: duration: > 3990.403 ms statement: NOTIFY test, '' > -- > 820776461-2013-03-15 09:50:59 MSK web@web 11630 LOG: process 11630 > still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3000.120 ms > 820776615:2013-03-15 09:50:59 MSK web@web 11630 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test71, '' > 820776683-2013-03-15 09:50:59 MSK ukraine@ukraine 8168 LOG: process > 8168 still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 > of database 0 after 3000.118 ms > -- > 820777290-2013-03-15 09:51:03 MSK web@web 11630 LOG: process 11630 > acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of database 0 > after 6374.424 ms > 820777435:2013-03-15 09:51:03 MSK web@web 11630 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test71, '' > 820777503-2013-03-15 09:51:03 MSK web@web 11630 LOG: duration: > 6374.557 ms statement: NOTIFY test71, '' > -- > 821538779-2013-03-15 09:57:00 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 14501 LOG: process > 14501 still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 > of database 0 after 3000.096 ms > 821538940:2013-03-15 09:57:00 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 14501 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test, '' > 821539013-2013-03-15 09:57:00 MSK web@web 7995 LOG: process 7995 > still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3000.111 ms > -- > 821539305-2013-03-15 09:57:01 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 14501 LOG: process > 14501 acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 4007.728 ms > 821539457:2013-03-15 09:57:01 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 14501 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test, '' > 821539530-2013-03-15 09:57:01 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 14501 LOG: duration: > 4007.905 ms statement: NOTIFY test, '' > -- > 822220899-2013-03-15 10:00:54 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 10849 LOG: process > 10849 still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 > of database 0 after 3000.138 ms > 822221060:2013-03-15 10:00:54 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 10849 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test138, '' > 822221136-2013-03-15 10:00:54 MSK web@web 7987 LOG: duration: > 4011.984 ms statement: COMMIT > 822221220-2013-03-15 10:00:54 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 10849 LOG: process > 10849 acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3100.606 ms > 822221372:2013-03-15 10:00:54 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 10849 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test138, '' > 822221448-2013-03-15 10:00:54 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 10849 LOG: duration: > 3100.799 ms statement: NOTIFY test138, '' > -- > 825472959-2013-03-15 10:28:16 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 5616 LOG: process > 5616 still waiting for AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 > of database 0 after 3000.112 ms > 825473118:2013-03-15 10:28:16 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 5616 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test, '' > 825473190-2013-03-15 10:28:17 MSK web@web 15984 LOG: duration: > 4019.454 ms statement: COMMIT > 825473275-2013-03-15 10:28:17 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 5616 LOG: process > 5616 acquired AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of > database 0 after 3909.825 ms > 825473425:2013-03-15 10:28:17 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 5616 STATEMENT: > NOTIFY test, '' > 825473497-2013-03-15 10:28:17 MSK OhGha5ya@rzdvo 5616 LOG: duration: > 3909.937 ms statement: NOTIFY test, '' > > > 2013/3/14 Bill Moran <wmoran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:24:45 +0400 Aln Kapa <alnkapa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> I connect to the database using the PGDAC, and then send a NOTIFY to > >> myself every minute. In this case, the logs get that. > >> > >> 2013-03-10 10:34:36 19797 LOG: process 19797 still waiting for > >> AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of database 0 after > >> 3000.100 ms > >> 2013-03-10 10:34:36 19797 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test105, '' > >> 2013-03-10 10:34:37 19797 LOG: process 19797 acquired > >> AccessExclusiveLock on object 0 of class 1262 of database 0 after > >> 3315.206 ms > >> 2013-03-10 10:34:37 19797 STATEMENT: NOTIFY test105, '' > >> 2013-03-10 10:34:37 19797 LOG: duration: 3315.322 ms statement: > >> NOTIFY test105, '' > >> 2013-03-10 14:27:43 19797 LOG: could not receive data from client: > >> Connection reset by peer > >> 2013-03-10 14:27:43 19797 LOG: unexpected EOF on client connection > >> > >> Tell me what's the problem? > > > > Are the last two lines your perceived problem? Is the NOTIFY working? > > > > There's really not enough information here to actually understand > > what you're asking. Based on the log information, it looks like > > a client program issues a notify, then drops the connection. Could > > be because in intervening network control device times out the TCP > > state, or could be because the client drops the conneciton, or > > because the client crashed, or is poorly implementd in that it looses > > its TCP socket. > > > > In any event, the 4 hour lag between the NOTIFY and the conneciton drop > > during which nothing happens seems to indicate that the two events > > are probably not related. > > > > Is any of that helpful? I feel like I don't understand your question > > and suspect that you didn't receive an answer to your first post > > because most people didn't understand it. If my comments don't > > address your question, perhaps try describing it differently. > > > > -- > > Bill Moran <wmoran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Bill Moran <wmoran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
