| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bob Ippolito <bob(at)redivi(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 8.1.0 catalog corruption |
| Date: | 2005-11-22 01:50:58 |
| Message-ID: | 6860.1132624258@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bob Ippolito <bob(at)redivi(dot)com> writes:
> I don't touch pg_class at all... this is what I'm doing (over and
> over again).
> -- clone_table is almost always a no-op, but once a day it creates a
> new table
> SELECT clone_table('ping', 'ping_%s', '')
> SELECT drop_ping_constraints('ping_%s')
> -- stuff that doesn't effect DDL
> SELECT add_ping_constraints('ping_%s')
Hm, do the drop/add constraint functions get executed even when
clone_table decides not to make a new table? If so, that would probably
explain the pattern I'm seeing in the dump of many updates of the
pg_class row.
This still doesn't give us a hint why the row disappeared, but maybe we
can try running these functions for awhile and see if anyone can
reproduce a failure.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-11-22 02:00:41 | Re: Practical error logging for very large COPY statements |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-11-22 01:40:38 | Re: Bug in predicate indexes? |