On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Alban Hertroys <dal...@solfertje.student.utwente.nl> wrote: > On 12 May 2010, at 12:01, Glyn Astill wrote: > >> Did you not mention that this server was a slony slave at some point though? >> >> Just because you have removed slony, and the error comes from postgresql >> itself does not mean the corruption was not caused by misuse of slony. > > Indeed. I wonder if "when we ere adding/removing slony to the system for Nth > time (due to it sometimes going out of sync)" may be caused by that as well. >
ok, so either upgrade to newer version of slony, or drop all tables, and recreate them every time slony is removed and readded to the database. And I guess the only reason postgresql doesn't like it, is due to slony's behavior. thanks guys. -- GJ -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
