| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Paul Dasari <pdasari(at)mdsol(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #11528: Max Index Keys |
| Date: | 2014-09-30 20:44:27 |
| Message-ID: | 20546.1412109867@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> writes:
> if its a Redshift specific bug, which that seems to imply, then you'll
> need to take that up with Amazon, as Redshift is a fork of a rather old
> and no longer supported version of PostgreSQL
max_index_keys is a GUC variable that reflects a server build
parameter, namely the maximum number of columns allowed in an index.
I am guessing that the JDBC driver is trying to read that variable
and it's not working because Redshift is descended from a PG version
that predates whenever we added that GUC. (Which was a long time
ago :-(.) I have no idea *why* the JDBC driver would need to know that.
You really need to ask about this on the pgsql-jdbc mailing list,
not here. There may not be a good solution other than using an ancient
JDBC driver with Redshift ... but the people who would know read that
list.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-09-30 20:46:29 | Re: BUG #11526: WITH tables not accessible from function |
| Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2014-09-30 20:10:25 | Re: BUG #11528: Max Index Keys |