Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Postgres problems with 6.4 / 6.5 (fwd)

From: "Oliver Elphick" <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Andrew McMillan <Andrew(at)cat-it(dot)co(dot)nz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Postgres problems with 6.4 / 6.5 (fwd)
Date: 1999-10-19 05:45:43
Message-ID: 199910190545.GAA09328@linda.lfix.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-hackers
------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Tue, 19 Oct 1999 07:45:23 +1300
From:    Andrew McMillan <Andrew(at)cat-it(dot)co(dot)nz>
To:      Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>
Subject: Postgres problems with 6.4 / 6.5

Hi,

I have a couple of problems with Postgres 6.5 and I'm not sure where to
put them (who to tell?).

Do you know if there is a place to notify bugs to for Postgres?  I am
using the Debian packages, so I can enter them there if necessary. 
Anyway, here's a brief description of the bugs I'm experiencing:

1)	Doing a pg_dump and psql -f on a database I get lots of errors saying
"query buffer max length of 16384 exceeded" and then (eventually) I get
a segmentation fault.  The load lines don't seem to be that large (the
full insert statement, including error, is maybe 220 bytes.  It seems
that if I split the dumped file into 40-line chunks and do a vacuum
after each one, I can get the whole thing to load without the errors.

I have only tested this on Version 6.5.1.


2)	I have a table with around 85 fields in it, and a cron job running
every 20 minutes which did a "SELECT INTO ..." from that table, did some
processing and then DROPped the new table.  After a few days I found
that my database was around 13MB, which seemed odd.  A couple of days
later it was around 17MB, and only a couple of records had been added.

Further investigation reveals that if I do a VACUUM immediately after
the DROP TABLE that things are OK, but otherwise the pg_attribute* files
in the database directory just get bigger and bigger.  This is even the
case when I do a VACUUM after every second 'DROP TABLE' - for the space
to be recovered, I have to VACUUM immediately after a DROP TABLE, which
doesn't seem right somehow.

The same behaviour seems to happen on both version 6.5.1 and 6.4.3 .



If you can pass these bugs on to an appropriate person I would
appreciate it.  In our company we are just starting to use Postgres and
I would like to see it becoming an important part of our repertoire.

Many thanks,
					Andrew McMillan.

_____________________________________________________________________
            Andrew McMillan, e-mail: Andrew(at)cat-it(dot)co(dot)nz
Catalyst IT Ltd, PO Box 10-225, Level 22, 105 The Terrace, Wellington
Me: +64 (21) 635 694, Fax: +64 (4) 499 5596, Office: +64 (4) 499 2267


------- End of Forwarded Message


-- 
      Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
                 ========================================
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver(dot)Elphick(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk
Isle of Wight                              http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
               PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
                 ========================================
     "Commit thy way unto the LORD; trust also in him and 
      he shall bring it to pass."          Psalms 37:5 



pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Victoria W.Date: 1999-10-19 06:17:15
Subject:
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 1999-10-19 05:33:09
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] is it possible to use LIMIT and INTERSECT ?

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Victoria W.Date: 1999-10-19 06:16:51
Subject:
Previous:From: Gustavo Madrigal SalazarDate: 1999-10-18 18:29:06
Subject: subscribe

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group