Re: Malfunction in dropping database with pgAdmin

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Sergei Abramov <auspex(at)rambler(dot)ru>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Malfunction in dropping database with pgAdmin
Date: 2009-08-14 08:01:53
Message-ID: 937d27e10908140101va3726d7u8ed59a5f05bea639@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 4:29 AM, Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Sergei Abramov<auspex(at)rambler(dot)ru> wrote:
>> Platform: Windows XP, 5.1 (Build 2600).Language: Russain.
>> Distribution used: Binary.
>> pgAdmin version: 1.10.0.
>> PostgreSQL version: 8.4.0-1.
>>
>> Bug description: When I use pgAdmin's menu command 'Delete/drop' to drop
>> database, especially just created, PostgreSQL server reports:
>> WARNING: could not remove file or directory "base/16435": Directory not
>> empty
>> WARNING: some useless files may be left behind in old database directory
>> "base/16435".
>>
>> However, specified directory appears empty and I have to delete it manually.
>> Database cluster is situated on local NTFS-drive (or local FAT-drive, just
>> for the experiment).
>> Note, that using dropdb.exe does not cause such a problem.
>> I've already reported this to pgAdmin's support team, they replied it is
>> PostgreSQL server that operates wrong...
>
> Do you have a link to the email message from the pgadmin folks?  I'd
> be curious what is causing this.

No link offhand, but what I said was that we just do a "drop database"
via libpq, exactly the same as dropdb would do, or as would happen via
psql. The only possible difference I could see was the database used
for the connection, but that shouldn't make any difference.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Carlos Alonso (ICtel Ingenieros) 2009-08-14 08:20:37 Re: BUG #4962: Pre-existing shared memory block is still in use
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-08-14 05:42:44 Re: BUG #4985: LIMIT documentation is insufficient