Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ehm...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: andrea gelmini <andrea(dot)gelmini(at)linux(dot)it>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ehm...
Date: 2002-01-11 20:16:12
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
andrea gelmini <andrea(dot)gelmini(at)linux(dot)it> writes:
> On ven, gen 11, 2002 at 01:56:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yup, it looks like a bug to me.  Apparently a CLOG segment has been
>> recycled too soon.  We just found a bug of that ilk in sequence
>> processing, but VACUUM doesn't touch sequences, so apparently you have
>> a different bug.  Please submit details.
> yes, i will retry tonight.
> what kind of info do you want?
> by the way i can give you script and the rest of things you need (and it will be very
> easily for you to reproduce the problem... the script is very simple, and
> schema is nothing more than a few tables).

Yes, I would like a copy of your script.

I just found and fixed a problem that could lead to this kind of failure
(reference to an already-deleted CLOG entry).  However, I'm not sure
that the problem I fixed could affect VACUUM itself.  Please update from
cvs (make sure you get src/backend/utils/time/tqual.c v 1.46) and then
see if you still see the problem.  If you do, a backtrace from the point
where elog() is called would be really helpful.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Re: ehm... at 2002-01-11 20:03:41 from andrea gelmini


  • Re: ehm... at 2002-01-13 12:17:57 from andrea gelmini

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 2002-01-12 04:32:06
Subject: Re: Bug #560: ODBC problem at migrating 7.0 to 7.1
Previous:From: andrea gelminiDate: 2002-01-11 20:03:41
Subject: Re: ehm...

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group