Re: [JDBC] Possible large object bug?

From: Peter Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: "Joe Shevland" <shevlandj(at)kpi(dot)com(dot)au>, <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Possible large object bug?
Date: 2001-03-29 08:52:05
Message-ID: 5.0.2.1.0.20010329095040.021219b0@mail.retep.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

At 10:37 27/03/01 +1000, Joe Shevland wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Semi-topical I hope ;)

Yes semi ;-)

> I've started using Postgres 7.1 (FreeBSD 4.2-S) and large objects via
> JDBC. (postmaster (PostgreSQL) 7.1beta5)

I'm forwarding this to the bugs list as it looks like something nasty in
the back end.

>Everything has been working nicely with storing/retrieving blobs, until
>last night during a vacuum of the database the backend process crashed
>with the messages added to the end of this email. I'm also using the
>'vacuumlo' contributed code. The order of the cron jobs is:
>
>59 2 * * * postgres /usr/local/pgsql/bin/vacuumlo -v db1 db2 db3
>59 3 * * * postgres /usr/local/pgsql/bin/vacuumdb -z db1
>59 4 * * * postgres /usr/local/pgsql/bin/vacuumdb -z db2
>59 5 * * * postgres /usr/local/pgsql/bin/vacuumdb -z db3
>
>so I was wondering if there might be a bug in the vacuumlo code (though
>its vacuumdb dying)? Or I was thinking, because they're development db's,
>that frequent dropping/recreating of tables is maybe causing the prob? The
>same vacuum commands have run fine before, both from cron and the command
>line, the only difference was slightly heavier dropping/recreating yesterday.
>
>I'm yet to see if that particular database is stuffed as I can recreate
>and retest easily enough. Let me know if I can give any further info,
>
>Regards,
>Joe
>
>---
>NOTICE: Rel pg_attribute: TID 1/115: OID IS INVALID. TUPGONE 1.
>...
>NOTICE: Rel pg_attribute: TID 1/6087: OID IS INVALID. TUPGONE 1.
>NOTICE: Rel pg_attribute: TID 1/6111: OID IS INVALID. TUPGONE 1.
>NOTICE: Rel pg_attribute: TID 1/6112: OID IS INVALID. TUPGONE 1.
>NOTICE: Rel pg_attribute: TID 1/6136: OID IS INVALID. TUPGONE 1.
>NOTICE: Rel pg_attribute: TID 1/6137: OID IS INVALID. TUPGONE 1.
>pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
> This probably means the backend terminated abnormally
> before or while processing the request.
>connection to server was lost
>vacuumdb: vacuum db2 failed
>---
>
>with ~500 of the NOTICE lines then the crash. About 1% give a TUPGONE 0
>ending instead.
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dirk Lutzebaeck 2001-03-29 08:55:09 Re: INSERT/SELECT with ORDER BY
Previous Message Marcin Kowalski 2001-03-29 08:35:06 Re: pg_dump potential bug -UNIQUE INDEX on PG_SHADOW Dont!! HELP

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Maurizio 2001-03-29 08:53:53 testing last sanpshot in QNX platform
Previous Message Marcin Kowalski 2001-03-29 08:35:06 Re: pg_dump potential bug -UNIQUE INDEX on PG_SHADOW Dont!! HELP

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Mount 2001-03-29 08:58:43 Re: RE: Compiling
Previous Message Peter Mount 2001-03-29 08:50:04 Re: RE: Compiling