-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane replied:
>> So as a general rule, the system tables should be considered a special
>> case as far as transactional activity? To be more precise, you are saying
>> that a system table must be locked in access exclusive mode before any
>> chan
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So as a general rule, the system tables should be considered a special
> case as far as transactional activity? To be more precise, you are saying
> that a system table must be locked in access exclusive mode before any
> change is made to guarant
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
> No, it's not a violation of ACID. In this case what you are doing is
> altering a table's schema without a sufficiently strong lock on the
> table, and that's a no-no, whether you would like it to be or not.
So as a general rule,
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Oh! Duh, that's your issue right there, I'll bet. The problem is that
>> relcache-open tries to read the pg_class row under SnapshotNow rules,
>> and if there is another xact concurrently modifying the row, it is
>> entirely p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Lane wrote:
> Oh! Duh, that's your issue right there, I'll bet. The problem is that
> relcache-open tries to read the pg_class row under SnapshotNow rules,
> and if there is another xact concurrently modifying the row, it is
> entirely possible
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Does the mentioned OID actually correspond to the OID of the table it's
>> supposed to be opening, or is it wrong? Is anything being done to
>> the table schema in parallel?
> Yes, it is the correct OID. No, nothing done to th
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> > It would help if you could get a stack trace at the moment of the
> > problem, but I'm not sure how to do that.
>
> Perhaps insert an abort() call right before the elog(ERROR)
> that's reporting this.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
(Jeff Davis: I've not changed the function, so it's not the plan cache)
Tom Lane wrote:
> Does the mentioned OID actually correspond to the OID of the table it's
> supposed to be opening, or is it wrong? Is anything being done to
> the table schema
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>> I'm encountering some disconcerting problems on a 8.1.3 database.
>> Very occasionally, I get a "could not open relation with OID xxx".
Does the mentioned OID actually correspond to the OID of the table it's
supposed to be
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> I'm encountering some disconcerting problems on a 8.1.3 database.
> Very occasionally, I get a "could not open relation with OID xxx".
> This always occurs inside of a plpgsql function, and always refers
> to a normal, stable table that has not been dropped. The first
On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 18:06 +, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> I'm encountering some disconcerting problems on a 8.1.3 database.
> Very occasionally, I get a "could not open relation with OID xxx".
> This always occurs inside of a plpgsql fun
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm encountering some disconcerting problems on a 8.1.3 database.
Very occasionally, I get a "could not open relation with OID xxx".
This always occurs inside of a plpgsql function, and always refers
to a normal, stable table that has not been droppe
12 matches
Mail list logo
