Re: "Cache lookup failed for relation 16905" ??

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "Cache lookup failed for relation 16905" ??
Date: 2002-11-02 20:17:29
Message-ID: 15065.1036268249@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org> writes:
> howe=# select p.oid, n.nspname, pg_get_userbyid(p.proowner), proname
> from pg_proc as p, pg_namespace as n where pg_table_is_visible(p.oid);

> However, this situation lead me into another issue. The new conversion
> functions (utf8_to_big5, iso_to_alt, etc.) appear as listed in every
> new scheme. Is this correct ? Shouldn't them be listed only in
> pg_catalog?

They would be, if you had remembered the join condition ;-)

where ... and p.pronamespace = n.oid

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Howe 2002-11-02 22:29:20 Re: "Cache lookup failed for relation 16905" ??
Previous Message am 2002-11-02 19:33:43 Re: Cursors: getting the number of tuples; moving backwards