Re: Relation 0 does not exist

From: Patrick Welche <prlw1(at)newn(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Relation 0 does not exist
Date: 2002-09-25 22:28:21
Message-ID: 20020925232821.C10728@quartz.newn.cam.ac.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 05:49:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Patrick Welche <prlw1(at)newn(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk> writes:
> > One thing which bugs me: I have a currval in there, and that is the very
> > first query which reaches the database, so it won't be "set", will it, but
> > then, how could it have worked for months with the other version of server?
>
> Good question. Do you have any ON INSERT rules on that table?

Curious: if I get the program to print what it thinks it is sending the
database, it does:

SELECT id FROM meter WHERE meterstart = '08:52:11 Mon 22 Jul 2002'
INSERT INTO stats (timeslice,timesliced,timeslicet,aps,...
SELECT MAX(fromoctets),MAX(tooctets) FROM stats,trans WHERE...
INSERT INTO trans (meter_id,stats_id,flowindex,firsttime,firsttimed,firsttimet,f

so, there currval should be OK. I was running postmaster -d4, yet the only
query I saw was the last LOG one. I pretty sure that I would see all queries
with -d3 before..
(Now postmaster won't shutdown pg_ctl: postmaster does not shut down)

Cheers,

Patrick

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-09-25 22:35:29 postmaster -d option (was Re: [GENERAL] Relation 0 does not exist)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-09-25 22:26:22 Re: Relation 0 does not exist

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-09-25 22:29:43 Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-09-25 22:27:59 Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?