Re: [BUGS] BUG #8514: cache lookup failed for relation 421062806
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > my postgresql running file . but sometime i found cache lookup failed for > relation 421062806 error in postgresql log. can anyone tell me significant > of this error. A relation has disappeared even if the session hold a sufficient lock on it, ensuring that the relation have to be present. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
[BUGS] PostgreSQL Service on Windows does not start.
Hi All, I have found a case that PostgreSQL Service does not start. When it happens, the following error appears. "is not a valid Win32 application" This failure occurs when the following conditions are true. 1. There is "postgres.exe" in any directory that contains a space, such as "Program Files". e.g.) C:\Program Files\PostgreSQL\bin\postgres.exe 2. A file using the first white space-delimited tokens of that directory as the file name exists, and there is it in the same hierarchy. e.g.) C:\Program //file "pg_ctl.exe" as PostgreSQL Service creates a postgres process using an absolute path which indicates the location of "postgres.exe",but the path is not enclosed in quotation. Therefore,if the above-mentioned conditions are true, CreateProcessAsUser(a Windows Function called by pg_ctl.exe) tries to create a process using the other file such as "Program", so the service fails to start. Accordingly, I think that the command path should be enclosed in quotation. I created a patch to fix this failure, So could anyone confirm? Regards, Naoya --- Naoya Anzai Engineering Department NEC Soft, Ltd. E-Mail: anzai-na...@mxu.nes.nec.co.jp --- pg_ctl.c.patch Description: pg_ctl.c.patch -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8467: Slightly confusing pgcrypto example in docs
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 08:32:32PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > How can the later entry not be MD5 hash? > > > > Because what you pass to the functions is 'md5', not 'md5 hash', which > > is what the new text appears to indicate. > > So if we revert, will it still be clear what is MD5 and what is MD5 hash? I mean, will it be clear what is MD5 crypt and what is MD5 hash? -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8467: Slightly confusing pgcrypto example in docs
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 08:22:30PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 19:14 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > The changes shown below are incorrect, I think. > > > > > > > > > On 10/2/13 12:00 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > *** gen_salt(type text [, iter_count integer > > > > *** 353,359 > > > > 12 years > > > > > > > > > > > > !md5 > > > > 2345086 > > > > 1 day > > > > 3 years > > > > --- 358,364 > > > > 12 years > > > > > > > > > > > > !md5 hash > > > > Uh, the table already has a mention of md5 crypt above: > > > >crypt-md5 > > > > How can the later entry not be MD5 hash? > > Because what you pass to the functions is 'md5', not 'md5 hash', which > is what the new text appears to indicate. So if we revert, will it still be clear what is MD5 and what is MD5 hash? -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8467: Slightly confusing pgcrypto example in docs
On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 19:14 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > The changes shown below are incorrect, I think. > > > > > > On 10/2/13 12:00 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > *** gen_salt(type text [, iter_count integer > > > *** 353,359 > > > 12 years > > > > > > > > > !md5 > > > 2345086 > > > 1 day > > > 3 years > > > --- 358,364 > > > 12 years > > > > > > > > > !md5 hash > > Uh, the table already has a mention of md5 crypt above: > >crypt-md5 > > How can the later entry not be MD5 hash? Because what you pass to the functions is 'md5', not 'md5 hash', which is what the new text appears to indicate. -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8516: Calling VOLATILE from STABLE function
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 04:10:35PM -0700, Dwayne Towell wrote: > > According to the documentation, f() should be marked VOLATILE also, since > > calling f() produces side effects. PostgreSQL does not give a warning (or > > better yet, an error); I think it should. > > I think the answer is that function authors are required to prevent > functions they mark as STABLE from calling VOLATILE functions. > > -- > > I understand it's an error (at least usually), my question/issue is why does > PostgreSQL NOT give at least a warning when a programmer (probably > accidentally) calls a VOLATILE function in one that he has specifically > tagged as STABLE? The compiler has all the information to notify the > programmer of a mistake, but isn't. This violates a fundamental principle of > software engineering--take every opportunity to prevent errors. Well, we can't walk the function tree to know all called functions, and those they call, so we don't even try. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8467: Slightly confusing pgcrypto example in docs
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 04:05:50PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > The changes shown below are incorrect, I think. > > > On 10/2/13 12:00 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > *** gen_salt(type text [, iter_count integer > > *** 353,359 > > 12 years > > > > > > !md5 > > 2345086 > > 1 day > > 3 years > > --- 358,364 > > 12 years > > > > > > !md5 hash Uh, the table already has a mention of md5 crypt above: crypt-md5 How can the later entry not be MD5 hash? > > 2345086 > > 1 day > > 3 years > > *** gen_salt(type text [, iter_count integer > > *** 380,386 > > > > > > > > ! md5 numbers are from mdcrack 1.2. > > > > > > > > --- 385,391 > > > > > > > > ! md5 hash numbers are from mdcrack 1.2. > > > > > > > > *** gen_random_bytes(count integer) returns > > *** 1343,1349 > > OpenBSD sys/crypto > > > > > > ! MD5 and SHA1 > > WIDE Project > > KAME kame/sys/crypto > > > > --- 1348,1354 > > OpenBSD sys/crypto > > > > > > ! MD5 hash and SHA1 > > WIDE Project > > KAME kame/sys/crypto > > > Again, "MD5 crypt" is mentioned in the same table above: MD5 crypt so how can this not be md5 hash? -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8516: Calling VOLATILE from STABLE function
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 08:58:46PM +, dwa...@docketnavigator.com wrote: > The following bug has been logged on the website: > > Bug reference: 8516 > Logged by: Dwayne Towell > Email address: dwa...@docketnavigator.com > PostgreSQL version: 9.2.4 > Operating system: CentOS > Description: > > Why doesn't PostgreSQL give a warning when calling a volatile function from > a stable function? > > > For example: > CREATE TABLE x (val double); > > > CREATE FUNCTION g() RETURNS boolean AS $$ > INSERT INTO x SELECT rand() RETURNING val>0.5; > $$ LANGUAGE SQL VOLATILE; > > > CREATE FUNCTION f() RETURNS boolean AS $$ > SELECT g(); -- this is where the stability-violation happens > $$ LANGUAGE SQL STABLE; -- this is a lie > > > According to the documentation, f() should be marked VOLATILE also, since > calling f() produces side effects. PostgreSQL does not give a warning (or > better yet, an error); I think it should. I think the answer is that function authors are required to prevent functions they mark as STABLE from calling VOLATILE functions. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] Completely broken replica after PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Could you please give me a hint of how to check if this patch was >> included in 9.2.5 or not? > > Yes, this was committed in June: > > commit 99ee15b315c187045a95db7b27fd9d866aea93e0 > Author: Simon Riggs > Date: Sun Jun 23 11:05:02 2013 +0100 Good news, thank you. -- Kind regards, Sergey Konoplev PostgreSQL Consultant and DBA http://www.linkedin.com/in/grayhemp +1 (415) 867-9984, +7 (901) 903-0499, +7 (988) 888-1979 gray...@gmail.com -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] Completely broken replica after PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages
Sergey Konoplev escribió: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Sergey Konoplev writes: > >> Just curious, what is the planned date for the next minor release, and > >> BTW where is it possible to see the roadmap for minor releases? > > > > There is no planned date, and certainly no "roadmap". We make minor > > releases when the core team judges that enough (or severe enough) > > fixes have accumulated since the last time. Historically we've averaged > > about four minor releases a year, but that's not set in stone anywhere. > > Could you please give me a hint of how to check if this patch was > included in 9.2.5 or not? Yes, this was committed in June: commit 99ee15b315c187045a95db7b27fd9d866aea93e0 Author: Simon Riggs Date: Sun Jun 23 11:05:02 2013 +0100 -- Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] Completely broken replica after PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Sergey Konoplev writes: >> Just curious, what is the planned date for the next minor release, and >> BTW where is it possible to see the roadmap for minor releases? > > There is no planned date, and certainly no "roadmap". We make minor > releases when the core team judges that enough (or severe enough) > fixes have accumulated since the last time. Historically we've averaged > about four minor releases a year, but that's not set in stone anywhere. Could you please give me a hint of how to check if this patch was included in 9.2.5 or not? -- Kind regards, Sergey Konoplev PostgreSQL Consultant and DBA http://www.linkedin.com/in/grayhemp +1 (415) 867-9984, +7 (901) 903-0499, +7 (988) 888-1979 gray...@gmail.com -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] error
On 10/10/2013 7:18 AM, Andrius Di wrote:
Hello, how to solve this error (please see attachment)?
what exactly were you doing when you got this error, what Windows
version was this on, etc etc?
the error is pretty explicit, I would inspect the value of your COMSPEC
environment variable. for instance, at a CMD ('dos') prompt, type the
command,
ECHO %COMSPEC%
and you should get something like...
C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe
p.s please direct replies to pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org and not me
personally.
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8517: Problem due to libeay32.dll about ordinal
On 10/10/2013 6:27 AM, s.mech...@gmail.com wrote: I'm trying since yesterday to install a software which needs to install postgreSQL 8.4 aswell. When the installation is finished, a message appears a few times which says "The 3873 ordinal can't be find in the LIBEAY32.dll dynamic library" (in french) So i suppose i've some corrupted files, but could you maybe light me on about this problem ? I'd contact the distributors or authors of this 'a software', if its got its own postgres 8.4 build bundled with it. I do hope its not 8.4.0, thats VERY obsolete, 8.4 is currently up to 8.4.18. libeay32.dll is, I believe, part of OpenSSL, which is bundled into PostgreSQL to support SSL connections. that error suggests a version mismatch, where something is trying to call an entry point in that library which doesn't exist. this software you're installing, is it tested and supported on win7? p.s please direct replies to pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org and not me personally. -- john r pierce 37N 122W somewhere on the middle of the left coast -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
[BUGS] error
Hello, how to solve this error (please see attachment)? Regards, AnDi <> -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
[BUGS] BUG #8517: Problem due to libeay32.dll about ordinal
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8517 Logged by: Sémy Email address: s.mech...@gmail.com PostgreSQL version: 8.4.0 Operating system: Windows 7 - 32bits Description: Hello, I'm trying since yesterday to install a software which needs to install postgreSQL 8.4 aswell. When the installation is finished, a message appears a few times which says "The 3873 ordinal can't be find in the LIBEAY32.dll dynamic library" (in french) So i suppose i've some corrupted files, but could you maybe light me on about this problem ? Thank you, Regards, Sémy -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
[BUGS] Bit String expand bug
Hello, There's a problem with expanding Bit String data types, it make right padding with 0 instead of left padding , making the bit mask almost useless. There is an workaround for that, like mask::bit(n) >> (n-length(mask)), but is much slower than directly left padding on expand. I wonder if is this intended for Big Endian processing or is just wrong coded. Have a nice day ! -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
[BUGS] BUG #8516: Calling VOLATILE from STABLE function
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 8516 Logged by: Dwayne Towell Email address: dwa...@docketnavigator.com PostgreSQL version: 9.2.4 Operating system: CentOS Description: Why doesn't PostgreSQL give a warning when calling a volatile function from a stable function? For example: CREATE TABLE x (val double); CREATE FUNCTION g() RETURNS boolean AS $$ INSERT INTO x SELECT rand() RETURNING val>0.5; $$ LANGUAGE SQL VOLATILE; CREATE FUNCTION f() RETURNS boolean AS $$ SELECT g(); -- this is where the stability-violation happens $$ LANGUAGE SQL STABLE; -- this is a lie According to the documentation, f() should be marked VOLATILE also, since calling f() produces side effects. PostgreSQL does not give a warning (or better yet, an error); I think it should. -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Re: [BUGS] BUG #8467: Slightly confusing pgcrypto example in docs
The changes shown below are incorrect, I think. On 10/2/13 12:00 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > *** gen_salt(type text [, iter_count integer > *** 353,359 > 12 years > > > !md5 > 2345086 > 1 day > 3 years > --- 358,364 > 12 years > > > !md5 hash > 2345086 > 1 day > 3 years > *** gen_salt(type text [, iter_count integer > *** 380,386 > > > > ! md5 numbers are from mdcrack 1.2. > > > > --- 385,391 > > > > ! md5 hash numbers are from mdcrack 1.2. > > > > *** gen_random_bytes(count integer) returns > *** 1343,1349 > OpenBSD sys/crypto > > > ! MD5 and SHA1 > WIDE Project > KAME kame/sys/crypto > > --- 1348,1354 > OpenBSD sys/crypto > > > ! MD5 hash and SHA1 > WIDE Project > KAME kame/sys/crypto > -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
