Same rule patch, right email this time :)
Lock on the rule relation wasn't removed after adding the comment.
On Wed, 2002-10-02 at 19:03, Laurette Cisneros wrote:
> Ok, finally had time to narrow this down.
>
> Here's the simplified script that will reproduce this (this sequence
> reroduces on my system using 7.3b2):
>
> \echo BEGIN tst.sql
>
> create table pp
> ( x integer
> , i text
> );
>
> create view p as
> select * from pp where i is null;
>
> comment on view p is
> 'This is a comment.';
>
> create rule p_ins as on insert to p do instead
> insert into pp
> values ( new.x
> , null
> );
>
> comment on rule p_ins is 'insert to p goes to pp';
>
> \echo END tst.sql
>
>
> On 26 Sep 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 16:46, Laurette Cisneros wrote:
> > >
> > > I am so glad that postgres now keeps track of relationships between rule,
> > > views, functions, tables, etc. I've had to re-do all my creation and drop
> > > scripts but this is definitely for the better.
> > >
> > > During my testing of my scripts, I have come across this message:
> > > psql:/u1/cvs73/DataBase/Config/Schema/logconfig.sql:142: WARNING: Relcache reference leak: relation "positions"
hasrefcnt 1 instead of 0
> > >
> > > What does this indicate?
> >
> > Someone (probably me) made a mistake and forgot to release a cache
> > handle.
> >
> > Do you happen to have a sequence of commands that can reproduce this?
> >
> >
>
> --
> Laurette Cisneros
> The Database Group
> (510) 420-3137
> NextBus Information Systems, Inc.
> www.nextbus.com
> ------------------------------
> Do you know where your bus is?
>
>
--
Rod Taylor