The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4407
Logged by: Kevin Jenkins
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.3.3 build1400
Operating system: Windows
Description:Bug in PQexecPrepared when using an integer primary key
that does not star
Tom Lane wrote:
> [ reincluding the mailing list ]
>
> Michael Milligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Okay, it reproduces and surprise surprise nLocks does overflow...
>
> > ERROR: lock AccessShareLock on object 16385/16467/0 is already held
> > lock(0x87408a028) id(16385,16467,0,0,0,1) grant
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> In any case, now that we know that nLocks overflow is actually possible
>> within real-world transaction lengths, it'd behoove us to do something
>> about that in 8.4 or beyond.
> Is this a TODO?
Yes, although I'm still waiting for mo
"Kevin Jenkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Description:Bug in PQexecPrepared when using an integer primary key
> that does not start at 1
I'd say this is pilot error, most likely in the form of putting
parameter values into the wrong elements of the parameter arrays
passed to PQexecPrep
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4409
Logged by: prasana venkatesh
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: pg3
Operating system: linux
Description:postmaster service is stopped
Details:
how to start postgrey post master service m
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4410
Logged by: Greg Sabino Mullane
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.3.3
Operating system: Linux
Description:Indexes not seen right away
Details:
I cannot reproduce, as this was on a prod
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I cannot reproduce, as this was on a production system and not seen again,
> but I created a simple index on a TEXT field, which was not chosen by the
> planner, even when seqscan was turned off. I analyzed the table, checked all
> the settings, e
[ back to this issue ]
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2008/8/26 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> ERROR: set-valued function called in context that cannot accept a set
>>
>> Hmm ... after a bit of poking at it, the reason it's failing is t
prasana venkatesh wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4409
Logged by: prasana venkatesh
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: pg3
Operating system: linux
Description:postmaster service is stopped
Details:
how to start pos
