Re: failed to re-find parent key

From: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: failed to re-find parent key
Date: 2004-01-14 03:14:40
Message-ID: 1074050080.1150.99.camel@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 21:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> writes:
> > I can't recreate it either, it is only happening on my customers
> > machines, which are using an older version of redhat (7.2) and gcc 2.96
>
> > Is it possible these versions are relevant to the issue?
>
> Hmm. Compiler bug maybe? I can't recall if gcc 2.96 had a good
> reputation or not. You might try backing off the optimization level
> and see if the behavior changes. Also see if there are any errata
> available for that compiler package.

Thanks for the advice, I'm going to do more tests to try to isolate it
>
> Also, is this just one machine or several? If only one, I'd try
> reindexing that index and see if that helps.

Actually the hack checks for oids, and doesn't make the index, if there
isn't an oid in the table, so I tried it with a table without oids, and
it still occurs.

Thanks for the replies; I'll post if I find something relevant.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 1467551

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Browne 2004-01-14 03:14:46 Re: What's planned for 7.5?
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-01-14 02:55:11 Re: failed to re-find parent key