Re: [BUGS] BUG #6061: Progresql.exe memory usage using HOLD cursor.

2011-06-16 Thread Delorme, Yann
Thanks Do you think that it will be fix in future release 9.1 ? Regards, Yann Yann Delorme Senior Software Engineer / Senior Software Engineer Esker SA Tél : +33 (0)4 72 83 46 46 Fax : + 33 (0)4 72 83 46 40 mailto:yann.delo...@esker.fr http://www.esker.fr/ ■ http://www.flydoc.fr/ CONFIDENT

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6061: Progresql.exe memory usage using HOLD cursor.

2011-06-16 Thread Guillaume Smet
Yann, 2011/6/16 Delorme, Yann : > Thanks > > Do you think that it will be fix in future release 9.1 ? Tom commited a fix in all the supported releases where the bug is present including 9.0: http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=669ac03af62328e4eb572dacb8ba319414ef1211

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6020: Wrong data type returned after CAST in FROM

2011-06-16 Thread Josip Rodin
Hi there, I've no idea if this is the proper way to append information about an existing bug report, please advise if not. The bug #6020 seems to have bit me, too, this kind of a query fails under PostgreSQL 9.0.4: SELECT * FROM acl_get_list('news', 258, 0); ERROR: wrong record type supplied in

Re: [BUGS] Behaviour of triggers on replicated and non replicated tables

2011-06-16 Thread Robert Haas
2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura : > I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of > postgres or a bug of slony: > > Postgres v8.4.8 > Slony-I v 2.0.5 > > I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another table > not replicated. > > The trigger on repl

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6054: Insert to table, which has fkey to table,which is parenttable for another table - error

2011-06-16 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Alex wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference:      6054 > Logged by:          Alex > Email address:      alexander.ochkal...@gmail.com > PostgreSQL version: 8.4.8 > Operating system:   CentOS > Description:        Insert to table, whic

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6053: Can't do DISTINCT on citext column

2011-06-16 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Regina wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference:      6053 > Logged by:          Regina > Email address:      l...@pcorp.us > PostgreSQL version: 9.1beta1 > Operating system:   Windows > Description:        Can't do DISTINCT on citext c

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6040: ODBC 64 + SSL Hangs

2011-06-16 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:43 AM, Jordi Areny wrote: > > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference:      6040 > Logged by:          Jordi Areny > Email address:      as...@ascii.cat > PostgreSQL version: 9.03 > Operating system:   Windows 7 64 bits > Description:        ODBC 64 +

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6038: configure warnings on sys/socket.h and netinet/in.h, make fails

2011-06-16 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Jeff wrote: > Building on MinGW/Msys on windows, here's the entire configure output. > Configure completes (with the warnings you see below, which specifically > said to report as bugs) and then make fails. > > I would not be surprised if I'm missing some other dep

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6039: Trying to use server status

2011-06-16 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Zajaczkowski wrote: > The following bug has been logged online: > > Bug reference:      6039 > Logged by:          Zajaczkowski > Email address:      mathias.zajaczkow...@ubik.ch > PostgreSQL version: 9.00 > Operating system:   Windows Server 2008 Standard Edition

[BUGS] could not read block XXXXX in file "base/YYYYY/ZZZZZZ": read only 160 of 8192 bytes

2011-06-16 Thread Антон Степаненко
Greetings. First and foremost - sorry for my bad english. I have PostgreSQL 9.0.4 installation using streaming replication, 1 master and 10 replicas. I've migrated to it about a month ago, from 8.3 and slony. Built-in replication is wonderful, slony sucks =), but I have some performance issues.

Re: [BUGS] could not read block XXXXX in file "base/YYYYY/ZZZZZZ": read only 160 of 8192 bytes

2011-06-16 Thread Kevin Grittner
* ** wrote: > [4-1] 2011-06-16 17:40:27 UTC LOG: startup process (PID 15292) > was terminated by signal 7: Bus error > Signal 7 means hardware problems. But all 10 replicas crashed > within 10 minutes, say from 13:35 to 13:45. > One important thing - all replicas and master are

Fwd: [BUGS] Behaviour of triggers on replicated and non replicated tables

2011-06-16 Thread Christopher Browne
2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura : > Hi, > I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of > postgres or a bug of slony: > > Postgres v8.4.8 > Slony-I v 2.0.5 > > I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another table > not replicated. > > The trigger o

Re: [BUGS] Behaviour of triggers on replicated and non replicated tables

2011-06-16 Thread Luiz K. Matsumura
Em 16/06/2011 19:17, Christopher Browne escreveu: 2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura: Hi, I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of postgres or a bug of slony: Postgres v8.4.8 Slony-I v 2.0.5 I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another t

Re: [BUGS] Behaviour of triggers on replicated and non replicated tables

2011-06-16 Thread Luiz K. Matsumura
Em 16/06/2011 16:39, Robert Haas escreveu: 2011/6/10 Luiz K. Matsumura: I need help to know if the follow scenario is a expected behaviour, a bug of postgres or a bug of slony: Postgres v8.4.8 Slony-I v 2.0.5 I have table replicated with slony and that do some updates in another table not re

[BUGS] BUG #6063: compatability issues

2011-06-16 Thread Praveen
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 6063 Logged by: Praveen Email address: spkumarvay...@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 8.4 Operating system: windows 7 Description:compatability issues Details: our application run on following platform Operatin