Re: failed to re-find parent key

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Dave Cramer
Тема
Re: failed to re-find parent key
Дата
Msg-id
1074050080.1150.99.camel@localhost.localdomain
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
failed to re-find parent key Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: failed to re-find parent key Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>

On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 21:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Cramer  writes:
> > I can't recreate it either, it is only happening on my customers
> > machines, which are using an older version of redhat (7.2) and gcc 2.96
> 
> > Is it possible these versions are relevant to the issue?
> 
> Hmm.  Compiler bug maybe?  I can't recall if gcc 2.96 had a good
> reputation or not.  You might try backing off the optimization level
> and see if the behavior changes.  Also see if there are any errata
> available for that compiler package.

Thanks for the advice, I'm going to do more tests to try to isolate it
> 
> Also, is this just one machine or several?  If only one, I'd try
> reindexing that index and see if that helps.

Actually the hack checks for oids, and doesn't make the index, if there
isn't an oid in the table, so I tried it with a table without oids, and
it still occurs.


Thanks for the replies; I'll post if I find something relevant.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
-- 
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 1467551


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Greg Stark
Дата:
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
FAQ