Vaccuum Failure w/7.1beta4 on Linux/Sparc

From: Ryan Kirkpatrick <pgsql(at)rkirkpat(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Vaccuum Failure w/7.1beta4 on Linux/Sparc
Date: 2001-03-12 14:06:08
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0103120656240.18661-100000@excelsior.rkirkpat.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


While testing some existing database applications on 7.1beta4 on
my Sparc 20 running Debian GNU/Linux 2.2, I got the following error on
attempting to do a vacuum of a table:

NOTICE: FlushRelationBuffers(jobs, 1399): block 953 is referenced (private 0, global 1)
ERROR! Can't vacuum table Jobs! ERROR: VACUUM (repair_frag): FlushRelationBuffers returned -2

The first line is the error message from pgsql, while the second line is
the error message from my application (using perl Pg module) reporting the
error message returned. It appears that this should only be a warning
(i.e. NOTICE, not FATAL or ERROR), but it caused the Pg module to throw an
error anyway. My application of course checks for errors, see the error
thrown by Pg and dies assuming the error was fatal.
This error occurred after a load of about 50k records into the
referenced table, a load of 50k records total into a few other tables, and
then a few clean up queries. The part of the application I was testing is
a database load from another (old, closed source) database. The vacuum
was at the end of the of the database load, as part of final cleanup
routines.
So, is this a problem with pgsql in general, specific to
Linux/Sparc, or a bug in Pg causing it to be too paranoid? Thanks.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain." |
| --- Philippians 1:21 (KJV) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Ryan Kirkpatrick | Boulder, Colorado | http://www.rkirkpat.net/ |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Mount 2001-03-12 14:35:41 Re: Banner links not working (fwd)
Previous Message Martin Devera 2001-03-12 11:26:47 Re: WAL & SHM principles