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

Re: Question

From: Paul Tillotson <pntil(at)shentel(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question
Date: 2004-04-28 02:43:36
Message-ID: 408F1A58.9030806@shentel.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
Jerry:

I bet you are using Microsoft Access to view the data.  From what I 
remember, Access prints #Deleted if the record that you try to update 
gets deleted (or if the primary key for the record gets updated) while 
you are looking at it.   In other words, if you are looking at the 
record that has

custid = 317, cust_name = 'John P Smith'

and you type "John Q Smith" in the cust_name, field, then ACCESS tries 
to do

UPDATE table SET cust_name = 'John Q Smith' WHERE custid = 317

behind your back.  If it finds that no rows were updated, then it 
concludes that the row with custid = 317 must not exist anymore, and 
prints #Deleted in all of the fields for that row.  (It may also 
periodically check to see that a record is still available, in which 
case the #Deleted might appear without you trying to edit anything.)

Does this table ever get updated or deleted from?  If so, check who else 
is deleting or updating while you are looking at the data.  You should 
make a careful check to see if this is the case before assuming that 
this is a problem with postgres.

Regards,
Paul Tillotson


>On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Jerry Robertson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>We have been running Postgre for over a year and are very pleased with its ease of use and performance.
>>
>>We have encountered one problem that has been minor until today and that is:
>>
>>Occasionally a row in a table get populated with #Deleted comments.  The entire row can not be deleted.  Generally
>>this does not get displayed, however, today it is.  Can you help?
>>    
>>
>
>Are these rows that maybe your application is doing this to, or are these 
>rows that are getting deleted in postgresql but still somehow showing up?
>
>It sounds like you've either found a very rare occuring bug (no one else 
>has reported anything like this that I've seen) or maybe are having some 
>kind of hardware issue where bits aren't getting set quite right.
>
>When postgresql "deletes" a tuple prior to it being vacuumed, it simply 
>sets a time stamp on it that vacuum can use to see it is "deleted" and no 
>longer visible.  If you are actually getting back tuples with the words 
>#Deleted in them, then I would guess you have an application error.
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>
>
>  
>


In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Paul TillotsonDate: 2004-04-28 03:18:22
Subject: Re: Arbitrary precision modulo operation
Previous:From: Brent WoodDate: 2004-04-28 02:15:45
Subject: help building datetime from varchars

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