Re: [GENERAL] Backend cache invalidation initialization failed... HUH?

From: "Ryan Schutt" <rschutt(at)vt(dot)edu>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Backend cache invalidation initialization failed... HUH?
Date: 1998-12-06 16:52:01
Message-ID: 006601be2138$bfc81a80$0200a8c0@ryan
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

We are upgrading from 6.3.2 to 6.4 today on solaris 2.5.1. I'll let you
know how it goes..

-Ryan

-----Original Message-----
From: Herouth Maoz <herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Date: Sunday, December 06, 1998 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Backend cache invalidation initialization failed...
HUH?

>At 1:25 +0200 on 4/12/98, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>
>> 6.4 has better cache code, which I am sure will fix this.
>
>Don't be very sure... So far, I have not managed to successfully install
>6.4 on my Solaris 2.5.1 (has very wierd regression results), and I saw
>another complaint to the same effect (can't create database) from another
>Solaris 2.5.1 user, who also claimed to have had problems with PG 6.3 (I
>never got around to installing 6.3 so I wouldn't know). Now, this is the
>third complaint about Solaris 2.5.1 which I see, and I have a bad feeling
>some factor was introduced with 6.3, which broke Solaris 2.5.1
>compatibility.
>
>Which would mean that I'll have to say goodbye to Postgres, especially
>since the mailing lists (I posted mine to this [GENERAL] list as well as
>the ADMIN list and got no response of any kind).
>
>It would be a real shame.
>
>Herouth
>
>--
>Herouth Maoz, Internet developer.
>Open University of Israel - Telem project
>http://telem.openu.ac.il/~herutma
>
>
>

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bzz Gy 1998-12-07 08:06:36 subscribe
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-12-06 16:23:07 Re: [GENERAL] Backend cache invalidation initialization failed... HUH?