Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Doug McNaught <doug@wireboard.com> writes:
> > Hmmm--AFAIK, VACUUM is supposed to grab locks on the tables it
> > processes, which will block until all open transactions against that
> > table are finished. So either VACUUM or your transactions will have
> > to wait, but they shouldn't interfere with each other.
>
> Upshot: a client holding an open transaction, plus another client trying
> to do VACUUM, can clog up the database for everyone else.
Thanks for the clarification. But the original poster's problem, that
VACUUM caused his transactions to fail, theoretically shouldn't
happen--right?
-Doug
--
Free Dmitry Sklyarov!
http://www.freesklyarov.org/
We will return to our regularly scheduled signature shortly.
