[BUGS] strange problem with ip6

2007-05-14 Thread Brian Hirt
I have postgresql installed on a mac, and I'm connecting from another mac on the network using ip6. When I try to select out of pg_stat_activity i get this error. I suspect the %en0 has something to do with the problem, but I'm no IP6 expert. load=# select * from pg_stat_activity ; ERRO

[BUGS] failed to re-find parent key in "..." for deletion target page

2007-08-04 Thread Brian Hirt
I was doing some testing with tsearch2 on my dev box and I've run across this problem. I created the tsvector and added the trigger and then i was updating the entire table to populate the ixdfti field. When i was done, I was unable to vacuum the table, I get this error. Any ideas an

Re: [BUGS] failed to re-find parent key in "..." for deletion target page

2007-08-13 Thread Brian Hirt
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get Tom the requested files. On Aug 10, 2007, at 8:11 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: Any news on this? Tom Lane wrote: Brian Hirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: basement_dev=# VACUUM FULL developer_name; ERROR: failed to re-find pa

[BUGS] autovacuum process (PID ...) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
Hi.When I'm doing a database load of a 5gb database, autovacuum alwayssegfaults shortly after the load finishes.  The load is being done via slony during the initial copy set command while building a slave, not throughpg_restore. LOG:  autovacuum process (PID ...) was terminated by signal 11LOG:  t

Re: [BUGS] autovacuum process (PID ...) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
that's strange, because I'm running 8.1.1. [EMAIL PROTECTED] root]# /usr/pg-8.1/bin/postmaster --version postmaster (PostgreSQL) 8.1.1 Is there more information i can provide to help find the problem? On Jan 4, 2006, at 10:04 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Brian Hirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g

Re: [BUGS] autovacuum process (PID ...) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
ND; $_$ LANGUAGE plpgsql IMMUTABLE; --brian On Jan 4, 2006, at 10:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Brian Hirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Is there more information i can provide to help find the problem? How about the schema of the table in question? If the backtrace is to be trusted, it

Re: [BUGS] autovacuum process (PID ...) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
servers to 8.1.1 this morning (this issue never came up during testing) and I'l like to get this in there because it's likely to happen again. --brian On Jan 4, 2006, at 11:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Brian Hirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I can analyze that table without problems.

Re: [BUGS] autovacuum process (PID ...) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
On Jan 4, 2006, at 11:47 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Brian Hirt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I was just writing to let you know I created an easily reproducible test case too, but I guess you don't need that now. Does your test case agree with my description of the problem? (If you&

[BUGS] BUG #2142: autovacuum process (PID 1641) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 2142 Logged by: Brian Hirt Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.1.1 Operating system: redhat 7.3 Description:autovacuum process (PID 1641) was terminated by signal 11 Details: When I'm

Re: [BUGS] BUG #2142: autovacuum process (PID 1641) was terminated by signal 11

2006-01-04 Thread Brian Hirt
Please disregard. I submitted last night via the web and when it didn't go through I joined the list and sent again. I guess it was just slow to go through. Thanks again to everyone who earlier today. --brian On Jan 3, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Brian Hirt wrote: The following bug has

[BUGS] bug with aggregate + multi column index + index_scan

2006-01-28 Thread Brian Hirt
I've run across a rather nasty bug in 8.1.2. It seems when the planer uses an index_scan within a GroupAggregate for a multi column index you can get incorrect results. fwiw i also see this on a dual xeon box running 8.1.1 and redhat 7.3. I've created a simple test case that I hope isola

Re: [BUGS] bug with aggregate + multi column index + index_scan

2006-01-29 Thread Brian Hirt
Tom, Yes, what you describe are exactly the circumstances that are required for our query to fail. Once again, thanks for the great help and quick fix. Do you think this fix will make 8.1.3? Best Regards, Brian Hirt On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Brian Hirt <[EM