On 2/26/20 11:37 AM, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
Sorry for the late reply, I've been on a short vacation…
Am 21.02.20 21:44 schrieb(en) Adrian Klaver:
1) From your original post what does the below mean?:
-- add several db functions
One trigger function, plus two “normal” ones, all (yet) unused.
Sorry for the late reply, I've been on a short vacation…
Am 21.02.20 21:44 schrieb(en) Adrian Klaver:
1) From your original post what does the below mean?:
-- add several db functions
One trigger function, plus two “normal” ones, all (yet) unused.
-- replace a DB function:
This was the
-
On 2/21/20 9:55 AM, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
Am 20.02.20 21:41 schrieb(en) Adrian Klaver:
It would be nice to know what:
[snip]
represented in:
Dropping and re-creating the function is actually the last operation in
the script. The function is /very/ simple (just a wrapper to hide all
interna
ror prior to this line]
2020-02-20 13:39:59.302 UTC [27971] agent@taskdb ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 1821571
2020-02-20 13:39:59.302 UTC [27971] agent@taskdb CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function get_result2(bigint) while casting return value to function's return type
2020-02-20 13:39
On 2/20/20 11:28 AM, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
Am 20.02.20 19:32 schrieb(en) Tom Lane:
This is, actually, not very surprising. You dropped the old function
while clients were using it. The new function is a completely
unrelated object, even if it happens to have the same name.
Yes, I agree that
Albrecht =?iso-8859-1?b?RHJl3w==?= writes:
> OK, but after fully stopping the daemon via systemctl (which of course
> disconnects all clients) and re-starting it, the cache is empty, isn't it?
> So the client after re-connecting /should/ find the proper function? In my
> case the full restart
Am 20.02.20 19:32 schrieb(en) Tom Lane:
This is, actually, not very surprising. You dropped the old function while
clients were using it. The new function is a completely unrelated object, even
if it happens to have the same name.
Yes, I agree that this was not a too clever approach…
It d
Given the explicit begin before drop/create, this is a bit of an unexpected
gotcha to have any impact on other transactions. Are there other known
limitations of DDL in a transaction?
I wrote:
> It does seem a bit annoying that something in plpgsql is apparently
> doing a fresh catalog lookup to find information that likely was
> already cached at the start of function execution. But I think that's
> a performance deficiency, not a bug per se.
I reproduced this issue locally (
o be
> replaced.
> Immediately after running the script, the log was filled with errors
> ---8<-----------
> ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 1821571
> CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function get_result2(bigint) while casting return value to
> f
nction get_result2() which ought to be
replaced.
Immediately after running the script, the log was filled with errors
---8<-------
ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 1821571
CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function get_result2(bigint) while casting return
se and
show
> me this error:
> ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 125999
This suggests you've actually lost some entries from pg_proc. Have
you had any system crashes or suchlike?
> Any suggestions, If I run pg_upgrade to 10, will these errors
>This suggests you've actually lost some entries from pg_proc. Have
>you had any system crashes or suchlike?
yes two crashes for power outages, this guys doesn't have dumps recent, only
to 2 days ago, I try recover the much data as possible.
>No, pg_upgrade can't magically restore data that's n
DrakoRod writes:
> I reindex the pg_proc table and reindex finished correctly but I try read
> the tables or make the dump and same error, reindexed the database and show
> me this error:
> ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 125999
This suggests you've actually lost
Hi Tom
I reindex the pg_proc table and reindex finished correctly but I try read
the tables or make the dump and same error, reindexed the database and show
me this error:
ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 125999
Any suggestions, If I run pg_upgrade to 10, will these errors be corrected
DrakoRod writes:
> I've a big problem with a database, is a PostgreSQL 9.6 version on Ubuntu.
> When a tried read some tables (approximately 7 of 1073) show this error:
> *ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 125940*
> So, I was reading this like data corruption specially
Hi folks!
I've a big problem with a database, is a PostgreSQL 9.6 version on Ubuntu.
When a tried read some tables (approximately 7 of 1073) show this error:
*ERROR: cache lookup failed for function 125940*
So, I was reading this like data corruption specially the postgresql's
syst
17 matches
Mail list logo
