to avoid the
issue in
the future:
ALTER SEQUENCE transfer_transferid_seq MAXVALUE 2147483647 CYCLE;
I can confirm this is still the case in HEAD:
decibel=# select max_value from s_s_seq ;
max_value
-
9223372036854775807
(1 row)
This does seem like a bug...
--
Jim
usesysid | 10
usename | postgres
current_query | VACUUM public.userdata_2409_messages_history
waiting | f
query_start |
backend_start | 2007-06-12 15:29:53.376641-05
client_addr |
client_port |
--
Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB http
unsigned ints or
tinyint? Just a matter of no one feeling the itch?
--
Jim Nasby[EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have
on a plane right now (is there any way to get that info out
of the local repository?)
--
Jim Nasby[EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3
On Aug 18, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Joel Stevenson wrote:
Is this the correct list to report issues with the
www.postgresql.org website and it's related sites? If not, I
apologize, could someone point me in the right direction?
-www would be better...
There seems to be a problem with list
On Aug 23, 2006, at 7:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let us assume that the second statement fails because value 'b' is
illegal.
Either the ODBC driver or the DBMS now rejects all follow-on queries
with the error message:
Error while executing the query;
Please cc the list
so others can learn.
Yes, I think a
patch for this was recently committed. I know it was at least discussed
somewhere...
-Original Message-From: dror
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 2:17
AMTo: Jim NasbySubject: RE: [BUGS] BUG
On Aug 1, 2006, at 7:24 AM, Jan Cruz wrote:
I am having problem with pg_restore 8.1.4
pg_restore: [custom archiver] out of memory
pg_restore: *** aborted because of error
Is that the only output you get?
What's maintenance_work_mem set to, and how much memory and swap do
you have? Is the
I don't know VB very well, but I'm guessing that you can't update a
recordset that's the product of a SELECT. In any case, it's certainly
not a PostgreSQL bug. If you need more help, try pgsql-general.
On Jul 28, 2006, at 11:54 PM, Jonas Bruhn wrote:
The following bug has been logged
More of a gotcha than a bug... basically, your select rule is hitting
the sequence again. I think there's a section in the rules chapter
that talks about this. GeneralBits might also have info.
Probably a better question is, what are you trying to do?
On Aug 4, 2006, at 4:50 AM, Nikolay
Have you tried with a different client? In any case, you'll probably
get more help on pgsql-odbc.
On Jul 29, 2006, at 3:44 PM, Jon Watte wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2556
Logged by: Jon Watte
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL
Does V_MYUSER have access to the PGDATA directory? This might be an
issue of it not having access to the directory you're running initdb
from...
On Aug 1, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Dror wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2558
Logged by: Dror
Email
Try using pg_dump from 8.1.4, which is the recommended procedure for
upgrading. You might have to go to an intermediate version first,
such as 7.4.13.
On Jul 26, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Boris wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2552
Logged by: Boris
Have you tried with another client and ODBC driver?
On Jul 13, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Dusan Halicky wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2530
Logged by: Dusan Halicky
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.1.4-1
Operating system:
This may have been fixed in a later version of 7.4. In any case,
you're exposing yourself to data loss bugs; you need to upgrade to
the latest 7.4 immediately.
On Jul 10, 2006, at 10:15 AM, Sudhakar wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2522
Logged by:
Without a core dump or a repeatable test case, there's not really
anything we can do to help you here.
On Jun 23, 2006, at 12:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 2491
Logged by:
Email address: [EMAIL
On Jun 23, 2006, at 1:14 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I make all connections and manipulations with tables by file with
commands.
ex: file contain many INSERT or several ANALYZE table.
then I do: cat file | psql base -U postgres.
Then past some time I see often message
On Apr 2, 2006, at 8:36 PM, Anthony Ransley wrote:
The Windows version of PostgreSQL 8.1.3.6044 has randomly crashed a
few times now. Can anyone supply me with the symbol set for the
8.1.3.6044 Windows release, so I can provide more information and
maybe even debug it.
On Apr 5, 2006, at 7:28 AM, William Leite Araújo wrote:
On 4/3/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(...)
You need to read up on SECURITY DEFINER functions.
regards, tom lane
Ok, I'll do this way, but still don't understand why it doesn't
returns.
I'm doing
You'll probably get better help from the windows installer folks
(there should be a mailing list somewhere on pgFoundry)... Have you
tried removing the postgres account? That would probably at least get
you running. The names and IDs thing sounds like a bug, but you'd
have to talk to the
I fail to see how this is a bug, but...
Are you running the webserver as root? Most systems don't do that
(for good reason!). You should turn on log_connections and
log_disconnections in postgresql.conf and see what it shows is
happening (you might need to turn up log_min_messages).
On
On Mar 8, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Matthew George [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The best practice is to do standard schema+data dumps, wherein the
ordering problem can be handled properly by not creating the FK
constraints until after the data is loaded. If you really want to
do a
22 matches
Mail list logo
