Re: "Cache lookup failed for relation 16905" ??

From: Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "Cache lookup failed for relation 16905" ??
Date: 2002-11-02 22:29:20
Message-ID: 1811725340.20021102192920@carcass.dhs.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello Tom,

Saturday, November 2, 2002, 5:17:29 PM, you wrote:

TL> Steve Howe <howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org> writes:
>> howe=# select p.oid, n.nspname, pg_get_userbyid(p.proowner), proname
>> from pg_proc as p, pg_namespace as n where pg_table_is_visible(p.oid);

>> However, this situation lead me into another issue. The new conversion
>> functions (utf8_to_big5, iso_to_alt, etc.) appear as listed in every
>> new scheme. Is this correct ? Shouldn't them be listed only in
>> pg_catalog?

TL> They would be, if you had remembered the join condition ;-)
Oh, hehe. It worked, thank you.
I remembered to include the condition on the other metadata queries,
but forgot this one.

Btw I wanted to thank you Tom and Bruce for the "HACKERS] 7.3 gotchas
for applications and client libraries" post, it really helped a lot.
And also for solving the issues on the returned info on INSTEAD rule
queries... thanks.

-------------
Best regards,
Steve Howe mailto:howe(at)carcass(dot)dhs(dot)org

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tommi Maekitalo 2002-11-02 22:42:28 missing const in PQescapeBytea/PQunescapeBytea in 7.3b3
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-11-02 20:17:29 Re: "Cache lookup failed for relation 16905" ??