Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Dave Page
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 06/25/2012 11:10 PM, Dave Page wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > > Dave: Is there any chance the installers link to that page from their error > dialogs, or a static-and-sanitised version of it in docs? If y

Re: [BUGS] server crash with "process 22821 releasing ProcSignal slot 32, but it contains 0"

2012-06-26 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Merlin Moncure writes: >>> 2012-06-25 09:08:08 CDT [postgres@ysanalysis_hes]: LOG:  could not >>> send data to client: Broken pipe >>> 2012-06-25 09:08:10 CDT [postgres@ysanalysis_hes]:

Re: [BUGS] server crash with "process 22821 releasing ProcSignal slot 32, but it contains 0"

2012-06-26 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> Ok, I'll look into reproducing the crash conditions.  Unfortunately >> this is a critical server and it crashed during a time sensitive >> process. I can schedule a maintenance window though but it will have >> to wait a bit. I suspect (bu

[BUGS] BUG #6707: ERROR: could not open relation with OID

2012-06-26 Thread lifeair
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 6707 Logged by: LiFeAiR Email address: life...@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 9.1.4 Operating system: FREE BSD Description: CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION test() RETURNS integer AS $BODY$ DECLARE _r RECORD;

Re: [BUGS] server crash with "process 22821 releasing ProcSignal slot 32, but it contains 0"

2012-06-26 Thread Tom Lane
Merlin Moncure writes: > I suspect (but haven't had time to prove and may not for several days > -- unfortunately going on vacation momentarily) that this might be > caused by pl/sh. Hm. The reported symptoms might be explainable if something had caused multiple threads to become active within t

Re: [BUGS] server crash with "process 22821 releasing ProcSignal slot 32, but it contains 0"

2012-06-26 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Merlin Moncure writes: >> I suspect (but haven't had time to prove and may not for several days >> -- unfortunately going on vacation momentarily) that this might be >> caused by pl/sh. > > Hm.  The reported symptoms might be explainable if some

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Jimmy Creeks
Hi, As I am having the installation problem and have tried installed postgresql tens of times, I am still in need of your help. Could you tell me under what folder generated by the installer I can find the installation log? Thanks. Best, Jimmy 2012/6/25 Craig Ringer > On 06/25/2012 04:19 AM,

[BUGS] BUG #6708: pgsql_fdw's foreign table cann't used in plpgsql function

2012-06-26 Thread digoal
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 6708 Logged by: digoal.zhou Email address: dig...@126.com PostgreSQL version: 9.1.3 Operating system: CentOS 5.x bit64 Description: pgsql_fdw's foreign table "cache lookup failed for type 0" bug when use

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6707: ERROR: could not open relation with OID

2012-06-26 Thread Tom Lane
life...@gmail.com writes: > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION test() RETURNS integer AS > $BODY$ > DECLARE > _r RECORD; > BEGIN > CREATE TEMP TABLE test(id int); > _r := ROW(NULL)::test; > _r:=NULL; > DROP TABLE test CASCADE; > RETURN1; > END; > $BODY$ > LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE > COST 100;

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Sachin Srivastava
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Jimmy Creeks wrote: > Hi, > > As I am having the installation problem and have tried installed > postgresql tens of times, I am still in need of your help. Could you tell > me under what folder generated by the installer I can find the installation > log? Thanks.

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Craig Ringer
On 06/26/2012 06:26 PM, Dave Page wrote: Any ideas for a one-liner to add? I'm struggling to find nice wording, that doesn't invite people to report issues without investigating themselves first: * If you need help, please review http://xx before seeking further assistance. The positive wo

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Jun 27, 2012 8:26 AM, "Craig Ringer" wrote: > > On 06/26/2012 06:26 PM, Dave Page wrote: >> >> Any ideas for a one-liner to add? I'm struggling to find nice wording, >> that doesn't invite people to report issues without investigating >> themselves first: >> >> * If you need help, please review

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Craig Ringer
On 06/27/2012 02:33 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > ... where that provides the common-issues list, a pointer to look at the installation log, then a report template for cases where it wasn't one of the common quick-fixes. > > I'm happy to work on the docs side, possibly even do a quick JavaScr

Re: [BUGS] BUG #6705: 32 bit

2012-06-26 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Jun 27, 2012 8:42 AM, "Craig Ringer" wrote: > > On 06/27/2012 02:33 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> >> > ... where that provides the common-issues list, a pointer to look at the installation log, then a report template for cases where it wasn't one of the common quick-fixes. >> > >> > I'm happ