> Ah, I see why the data-directory interlock file wasn't helping: it > wasn't checked until *after* shared memory was set up (read clobbered > :-(). This was not a very bright choice. I'm still surprised that > the shared-memory reset should've trashed your database so thoroughly, > though. > > Over the past two days I've committed changes that should make the > data directory, socket file, and shared memory interlocks considerably > more robust. In particular, mechanically doing "rm -f > /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" should never be necessary anymore. That's fantastic. Thanks for the quick fix. > BTW, your original message mentioned something about a recursive view > definition that wasn't being recognized as such. Could you provide > details on that? I can't. It's a few weeks ago, the database has been in furious development, and, of course, I didn't bother to save all those views that crashed my server. I keep trying to re-create it, but can't figure it out. I'm sorry. I think it wasn't just two views pointing at each other (it would, of course, be next to impossible to even create those, unless you hand tweaked the system tables), but I think was a view-relies-on-a- function-relies-on-a-view kind of problem. If I ever see it again, I'll save it. Thanks! -- Joel Burton, Director of Information Systems -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Support Center of Washington (www.scw.org)
