On 3/13/19 1:59 PM, Mariel Cherkassky wrote:
Hey,
The query was the first thing that I tried, it didnt solve the issue.
Guess I'll update to the latest version.
I read releases notes and I don't find any item that could be related to
the error you encounter. It could be either another bug in p
Yep, honestly this is far beyond my knowledge.
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 2:56 PM Corey Huinker
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 5:11 AM Flo Rance wrote:
>
>> It is an expected behavior. You can see the list of array operators with
>> which a GIN index can be used in the doc:
>>
>> https://www.pos
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 5:11 AM Flo Rance wrote:
> It is an expected behavior. You can see the list of array operators with
> which a GIN index can be used in the doc:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/indexes-types.html
>
> And a very good and detailed explanation about any operator he
Hey,
The query was the first thing that I tried, it didnt solve the issue.
Guess I'll update to the latest version.
בתאריך יום ד׳, 13 במרץ 2019 ב-14:48 מאת Alexandre Arruda <
adald...@gmail.com>:
> To avoid a dump/restore, use this:
>
> psql -o /dev/null -c "select * from table for update
To avoid a dump/restore, use this:
psql -o /dev/null -c "select * from table for update" database
Using the last releases of the major versions solve the bug for me.
Best regards
Em qua, 13 de mar de 2019 às 09:29, Mariel Cherkassky <
mariel.cherkas...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Hey,
> The logs ar
Hey,
The logs are full of info that I cant share. However, it full of the next
messages :
ERROR: found xmin 16804535 from before relfrozenxid 90126924
CONTEXT: automatic vacuum of table db1.public.table_1"
...
What I'm trying to understand here is if the bug was fixed or not. In the
first time i
On 3/12/19 8:58 AM, Mariel Cherkassky wrote:
Apparently the issue appeared again in the same database but on
different table . In the last time dumping and restoring the table
helped. However, I dont understand why another table hit the bug if it
was fixed in 9.6.9 while my db version is 9.6.10
It is an expected behavior. You can see the list of array operators with
which a GIN index can be used in the doc:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/indexes-types.html
And a very good and detailed explanation about any operator here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4058731/can-postgres
