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
id | 8674
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]
Enterpr
7;t support 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)---
(1 row)
Confirmed in 8.1.4 and HEAD, though I'm not sure what date it's from
since I'm 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
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;
ER
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 archiv
On Aug 15, 2006, at 8:50 AM, Luiz Henrique wrote:
my problem was problably corrupted index files. I recreated the
index and it's ok now. The hardware was being unpluged from power
source without shuthing down, I guess that's the cause.
What version are you using? In recent versions, indexes
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 #25
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: Window
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:
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
Em
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 address
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 ver
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 Samo
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 online:
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 ma
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 ".
then I do: cat | psql base -U postgres.
Then past some time I see often message "une
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 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 t
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.
What's the data c
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 Ma
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 in
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 data
23 matches
Mail list logo