On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 11:34:53PM +, Yusuf Siddiqui wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 2400
> Logged by: Yusuf Siddiqui
> Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> PostgreSQL version: 8.1
> Operating system: Linux
> Description:'Ã'
Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 2401
> Logged by: Theo Schlossnagle
> Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> PostgreSQL version: 8.1.3
> Operating system: Solaris 10
> Description:spinlocks not available on amd64
>
[Re: Uncaught exception when dividing integers]
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 10:50:24PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Is anyone working on this?
Not that I know of. However, the first step is to add this regression
test for SIGFPE [-patches CCed]. Note that this will probably redline
windows on the
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2401
Logged by: Theo Schlossnagle
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1.3
Operating system: Solaris 10
Description:spinlocks not available on amd64
Details:
Compiling 8.1.3 on solaris 10 x86
Please,
in Dreamweaver 8 (windows) no show column in table of the basedata
postgresql 8.X. How resolve???
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2400
Logged by: Yusuf Siddiqui
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1
Operating system: Linux
Description:'ÃÂ' considered invalid UTF-8 character
Details:
The character 'ÃÂ' is rejected a
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 10:15:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> > Not that I know of. However, the first step is to add this regression
> > test for SIGFPE [-patches CCed].
>
> This seems completely pointless. The question is not about whether the
> SIGFPE catcher wo
Hello!I want to ask you a favour.Could you give me a free shell acount for
bot.If you render me a favour I will be much obliged to you.Thank you for
your kindness !
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's
I'm not sure that's the whole story. "Server #3" had backends with
handles to the old relfilenode. It didn't have any fsync errors and the
old relfilenode was apparently successfully deleted (or at least it
wasn't visible in the file system anymore). That's the part of the
morning's investigatio
andrea suisani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> pg_dump: ERROR: could not open relation with OID 201327173
> pg_dump: SQL command to dump the contents of table "nominativi" failed:
> PQendcopy() failed.
> pg_dump: Error message from server: ERROR: could not open relation with OID
> 201327173
Hmm
"Peter Brant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here's the evidence from this morning. I have to admit I'm not really
> sure what to make of it though.
> ...
> - Same pattern as Server #1. bgwriter has a handle to the new
> relfilenode. Other backends have a handle to either old or new.
It seem
Here's the evidence from this morning. I have to admit I'm not really
sure what to make of it though.
Pete
The fsync / Permission denied errors occurred on 2 of 3 active servers
for the 7 am CLUSTER cycle.
Server #1 (with fsync errors):
- Both old and new relfilenodes are still visible with a
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> Well, depends how you look at it. The original bug report was about a
> backend crash, which is what happens if you don't catch the SIGFPE. Can
> we guarentee that we know every situation that might generate a SIGFPE?
The point here is that under Windows int4div s
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> Not that I know of. However, the first step is to add this regression
> test for SIGFPE [-patches CCed].
This seems completely pointless. The question is not about whether the
SIGFPE catcher works when fired, it's about what conditions trigger it.
Hi all,
short summary:
platform: i386 SMP (dual PIII)
os: linux 2.6.8.1
vendor: debian (3.1, stable)
pgsql ver: 7.4.7 (deb)
disk: tech. SCSI vendor. IBM model. DDYS-T36950N rev. S96H
controller: adaptec aic-7892a
description:
we're experiencing a weird problem
trying to get a dump of our db fo
15 matches
Mail list logo
