Daniele Varrazzo <daniele.varra...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Andrew Hammond > <andrew.george.hamm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> [ pokes around for a bit ... ] Hmm, can you say how the failing query >>> was submitted, exactly? I'm wondering if it came in via simple Query >>> (PQexec) or extended-query protocol (anything with parameters).
>> The command was sent from a python via django-1.2.1 using psycopg2-2.2.1 > PQexec then. Thanks for the followup. My current theory is that that's unrelated, though --- it now seems that this is just a race condition in the use of toasted pg_statistic entries. See http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-10/msg01366.php regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
