I used to use the connect-by patch, but have since rewritten everything to use a nested set model. I was
having problems that, while not immediately traceable back to the patch, showed up when I started
using it and went away when I stopped (strange locking behavior, crashing with vacuum full, problems after
dropping columns) . Plus the annoyance of maintaining a non-stock build across numerous installations
exceeded its benefits. Relying on it for a business critical situation became too much of a risk.
On Mar 26, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Qing Zhao wrote:
--------------------Thanks a lot! We were migrating to Postgres from Oracle and every now and then, we ran into something that we do not understand completely and it is a learning process for us.
Your responses have made it much clear for us. BTW, do you think that it's better for us just to rewrite everything so we don't need to use the patch at all? Why do others still use it?
Thanks!
Qing On Mar 25, 2004, at 6:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:Oh, good eye ... it's that infamous CONNECT BY patch again, without doubt.
Hey, who does this patch? What's wrong wiith it?
I'm just venting my annoyance at people expecting us to support hacked-up versions, especially without telling us they're hacked-up. This is the third or fourth trouble report I can recall that was eventually traced to that patch (after considerable effort).
Anyway, my guess for the immediate problem is incorrect installation of
the patch, viz not doing a complete "make clean" and rebuild after
patching. The patch changes the Query struct which is referenced in
many more files than are actually modified by the patch, and so if you
didn't build with --enable-depend then a simple "make" will leave you
with a patchwork of files that have different ideas about the field
offsets in Query. I'm a bit surprised it doesn't just dump core...
(That's not directly the fault of the patch, though, except to the
extent that it can be blamed for coming without adequate installation
instructions. What is directly the fault of the patch is that it
doesn't force an initdb by changing catversion. The prior trouble
reports had to do with views not working because their stored rules were
incompatible with the patched backend. We should not have had to deal
with that, and neither should those users.)
Theory B, of course, is that this is an actual bug in the patch and not
just incorrect installation. I'm not interested enough to investigate
though.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Andrew Rawnsley President The Ravensfield Digital Resource Group, Ltd. (740) 587-0114 www.ravensfield.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
