From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bernhard Schrader <bernhard(dot)schrader(at)innogames(dot)de>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
Date: | 2012-12-18 18:37:15 |
Message-ID: | 50D0B7DB.101@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
On 12/18/2012 01:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bernhard Schrader <bernhard(dot)schrader(at)innogames(dot)de> writes:
>> Beside of that, we tested a little bit more with the failing query:
>> The statement which is causing the error is a big UPDATE-statement with
>> FROM. After some testing we figured out that the subselect in the
>> FROM-clause is working fine. And if we simplify the UPDATE-statement
>> it's also working. We're able to show the data and we're able to do
>> simple updates on the table. But the two things combined are not
>> working.
> Does the table being updated have any indexes on enum columns? I'm
> suspicious that the bogus OID is in an index page somewhere, and not
> in the table at all.
>
> If that is the answer, then reindexing said index would get rid of
> the problem (as well as all evidence that would help us find out how
> it happened ...)
>
>
Unless they can make a physical backup of the datadir first.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2012-12-18 18:39:16 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-18 18:24:12 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2012-12-18 18:39:16 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-12-18 18:24:12 | Re: [ADMIN] Problems with enums after pg_upgrade |