[BUGS] BUG #3254: unexpected data beyond EOF in block

2007-04-26 Thread Mario Santini
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 3254 Logged by: Mario Santini Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.2.3 Operating system: CentOS Description:unexpected data beyond EOF in block Details: Hello, I use Mediawiki 1.9.3 with Post

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3252: Select Order by time

2007-04-26 Thread Lee Chua
Hi Kevin, Thanks for the response. I am a little embarrassed and I was in fact hoping that my stupid Report would just dissolve away in the abyss. In your responding I am of course quite bowled over that - Hey there are people genuinely out there - unlike reports one may send to mickeysoft who

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3254: unexpected data beyond EOF in block

2007-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
"Mario Santini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I use Mediawiki 1.9.3 with PostgreSQL 8.2.3 on a Linux CentOS : > Linux kabul.sodalia.it 2.6.9-34.ELsmp #1 SMP Wed Mar 8 00:27:03 CST 2006 > i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux > Query failed: ERROR: unexpected data beyond EOF in block 1311 of relation > "pg_toa

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3048: pg_dump dumps intarray metadata incorrectly

2007-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
Oleg, I still haven't seen this patch applied to CVS. --- Oleg Bartunov wrote: > On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> Tom, do you want this fixe

Re: [BUGS] BUG #3245: PANIC: failed to re-find shared lock object

2007-04-26 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Also, we have a generic issue that making fresh entries in a hashtable > might result in a concurrent hash_seq_search scan visiting existing > entries more than once; that's definitely not something any of the > existing callers are thinking about. > I'm too tired to think about fixes r

Re: [BUGS] setseed accepts bad seeds

2007-04-26 Thread Bruce Momjian
This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold --- Kris Jurka wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Tom Lane wrote: > > > It's not really possible to use it "incorrectly