| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Bitmead <chris(dot)bitmead(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Pretty bad bug in Postgres. |
| Date: | 1999-06-07 22:52:37 |
| Message-ID: | 25974.928795957@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Chris Bitmead <chris(dot)bitmead(at)bigfoot(dot)com> writes:
>> Following is I believe evidence of a pretty bad bug in postgres. This is
>> the 990329 snapshot.
>> httpd=> insert into category(name, image, parent) SELECT 'boo', 'boo',
>> oid FROM category* where name = 'foo';
>> INSERT 158370 1
>> httpd=> select * from category;
>> name |image|url|parent
>> --------+-----+---+------
>> foo |foo | | 0
>> bar |bar | |158321
>> Products|.gif | |
>> (3 rows)
>> Ok, what's going on here. The 'boo' record did not appear!
Chris, I can't reproduce this here anymore --- do you still see it with
current sources?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-06-07 22:56:33 | Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade problem |
| Previous Message | Oliver Elphick | 1999-06-07 22:35:42 | pg_upgrade loses all data |