From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Frost <jeff(at)pgexperts(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #15299: relation does not exist errors |
Date: | 2018-07-26 19:14:35 |
Message-ID: | 32321.1532632475@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Jeff Frost <jeff(at)pgexperts(dot)com> writes:
> On Jul 26, 2018, at 9:50 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> My first thought would be something to do with a restrictive search_path.
> Good thought. As far as I can tell we never change it from the default and everything in that DB is in the public schema.
Right, but what I'm half-theorizing is that the patches for CVE-2018-1058
affected you somehow. Maybe something "transiently" installed pg_catalog
(only) as search_path and forgot to remove it again. It would be easy
to explain it that way if the errors had been coming out of autovacuum
worker processes, for instance, though your log didn't match that exactly.
If you see it again it would be a good idea to look very closely at what
happened right before the errors started.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Soni M | 2018-07-26 19:46:28 | Scanning all partition when more than 100 items in "where id in ()" clause |
Previous Message | Jeff Frost | 2018-07-26 19:05:55 | Re: BUG #15299: relation does not exist errors |