Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Mathieu Fenniak wrote:
>
> > I entered a bug report yesterday through the PostgreSQL web site
> > that was assigned bug ID 4906. However, looking through the
> > pgsql-bugs list, I don't see the posting I entered -- is it possible
> > this bug report disappeared into th
"Juan C. Aragon" writes:
> 2009-07-16 16:54:05 EDTWARNING: out of shared memory
> 2009-07-16 16:54:05 EDTFATAL: out of shared memory
You might be running out of lock-table space ... does raising
max_locks_per_transaction help? (Note you need a postmaster restart
to change that.)
Mathieu Fenniak wrote:
> I entered a bug report yesterday through the PostgreSQL web site
> that was assigned bug ID 4906. However, looking through the
> pgsql-bugs list, I don't see the posting I entered -- is it possible
> this bug report disappeared into the void? Should I resubmit it?
A
David Kerr wrote:
> I'm working on my management to allow me to roll my own PG and get a
> 3rd party support.
FWIW, we're a SLES shop, and we've found it best to build our own.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
htt
cc: the -list this time
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jaime Casanova
Date: Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: [BUGS] WARNING: out of shared memory
To: "Juan C. Aragon"
it's better for you to always write to the list because there are more
people that can help and the mo
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Juan C. Aragon wrote:
> We are working on Windows Server 2003 Enterprise with PostgreSQL 8.4, when
> we start populating a table with 130,000 records it start giving “WARNING:
> out of shared memory”
>
> on every record that was inserted. At the end it did not finis
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Juan C. Aragon wrote:
> I’m getting this error message continuously in Windows Server 2008 using
> PostgreSQL 8.4 release version:
>
> FATAL: could not reattach to shared memory (key=268, addr=01E3): 487
>
there is a patch being tested for a problem that looks
We are working on Windows Server 2003 Enterprise with PostgreSQL 8.4, when
we start populating a table with 130,000 records it start giving "WARNING:
out of shared memory"
on every record that was inserted. At the end it did not finish, it only
inserted 4,000 records and got the following messa
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Roman Kononov wrote:
>
> test=# create table junk(i int);
> CREATE TABLE
> test=# select * from junk left outer join (select coalesce(i,1) as x,
> coalesce(i,2) as y from junk) t on coalesce(i,3)=x and coalesce(i,4)=y and
> coalesce(i,5)=x;
> ERROR: too few pathkey
Hi,
I played a bit with the interval syntax and found this, this time on a 8.4
release:
psql -ddb_frank
psql (8.4.0)
Type "help" for help.
db_frank=# select interval '2.5' year;
interval
--
2 years
(1 row)
db_frank=# select interval '2.5 year';
interval
2 year
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4926
Logged by: Roman Kononov
Email address: kono...@ftml.net
PostgreSQL version: 8.4.0
Operating system: Linux x86_64
Description:too few pathkeys for mergeclauses
Details:
test=# create table junk(i int);
CR
Hi Tom,
> >> Those are bugs (although there is probably only one bug and the rest is
> >> collateral damage). May we have a test case?
> >
> > Scripts, triggers and stuff are a bit complex, before assigning the
> > resources for that, could we help with creating a backtrace?
>
> You did show a ba
I'm getting this error message continuously in Windows Server 2008 using
PostgreSQL 8.4 release version:
FATAL: could not reattach to shared memory (key=268, addr=01E3): 487
Below is part of the log:
FATAL: could not reattach to shared memory (key=268, addr=01E3): 487
2009-07
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4925
Logged by: Steve Caligo
Email address: steve.cal...@ctie.etat.lu
PostgreSQL version: 8.3.7 and 8.4.0
Operating system: Archlinux and Gentoo 8.3.7, Gentoo 8.4.0
Description:"select ... for update" doesn't af
Op donderdag 16 juli 2009, schreef Tom Lane:
> >> Those are bugs (although there is probably only one bug and the rest is
> >> collateral damage). May we have a test case?
> >
> > Scripts, triggers and stuff are a bit complex, before assigning the
> > resources for that, could we help with creatin
Yes, it seems problem in pg_auth flat file.
We are using db users to manage access rights to db tables and data, that
way we have two layer security - application and DB. Each system user has
it's own group role and groups have different access levels.
So we cannot use one login role for all user
2009/7/15 Frank van Vugt :
> Hi Tom,
> Yep, after applying it yesterday evening, we didn't see this problem at all
> today, so it definitely looks as if this patch nailed it.
> Thanks for the [great|quick] support !
I confirm that too - no errors after applying the patch. Great work
Tom, thanks
Frank van Vugt writes:
>> Those are bugs (although there is probably only one bug and the rest is
>> collateral damage). May we have a test case?
> Scripts, triggers and stuff are a bit complex, before assigning the resources
> for that, could we help with creating a backtrace?
You did show a
Hi,
> > WARNING: AbortSubTransaction while in ABORT state
> > WARNING: did not find subXID 75610 in MyProc
> > ERROR: tupdesc reference 0x7ffe74eaf028 is not owned by resource owner
> > SubTransaction
>
> Those are bugs (although there is probably only one bug and the rest is
> collateral damage).
Frank van Vugt writes:
> WARNING: AbortSubTransaction while in ABORT state
> WARNING: did not find subXID 75610 in MyProc
> ERROR: tupdesc reference 0x7ffe74eaf028 is not owned by resource owner
> SubTransaction
Those are bugs (although there is probably only one bug and the rest is
collateral d
L.S.
We're working on some conversion script which in itself ran fine. We then
added a couple of additional checks, one of which was wrong and thus bailed
out, but ran into the following (from the log):
LOG: statement: update stock_item_composition set ..
ERROR: new row for relation "site
21 matches
Mail list logo
