darcy(at)druid(dot)net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> The top of the backtrace looks like this.
> #0 0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
> #1 0xd1087a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
> #2 0x10045cf4 in or_clause (clause=0x0) at clauses.c:211
> #3 0x10075d68 in int82ge (fcinfo=0x1015cfc8) at int8.c:343
> #4 0x1005909c in _readArrayRef () at readfuncs.c:924
> #5 0x10059b68 in _readSeqScan () at readfuncs.c:600
I don't believe a word of that backtrace, and neither should you.
The alleged call arcs at levels below #1 do not exist in the code.
Ergo, I doubt the top two levels can be trusted either.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Hannu Krosing||Date: 2001-05-28 17:41:40|
|Subject: Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem|
|Previous:||From: Vadim Mikheev||Date: 2001-05-28 17:15:17|
|Subject: Re: AW: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem|