| From: | Patrick Welche <prlw1(at)newn(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] alter_table.sql |
| Date: | 2000-03-08 18:58:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20000308185828.A29001@quartz.newn.cam.ac.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 02:29:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hmm. Since there have been examples of vacuum analyze <tablename> in
> the numeric regress test since 6.5, I'd think we'd have heard about it
> if there were any widespread problem ;-). Perhaps it is a platform
> issue, but I suspect you will find there are additional constraints that
> explain why no one but you is seeing it. Please do dig into it ... or,
> if you do not have time, you could consider giving one of the other
> developers a login on your machine and that person could check it out.
Story so far: I have a table called "found". vacuum() in src/backend/commands/vacuum.c
gets called with vacrel="found". During vc_init() at line 177, vacrel is cleared (="").
More tomorrow...
Cheers,
Patrick
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-03-08 19:29:36 | Re: [HACKERS] alter_table.sql |
| Previous Message | Ed Loehr | 2000-03-08 17:19:18 | [HACKERS] Transaction abortions & recovery handling |