Re: plpgsql no longer exists

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bricklen Anderson
Тема Re: plpgsql no longer exists
Дата
Msg-id 424742F3.8070207@presinet.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: plpgsql no longer exists  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: plpgsql no longer exists  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-general
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bricklen Anderson <bricklen@shaw.ca> writes:
>
>>>Once I recompile the function, I no longer get that message. Is there
>>>anything else that I can check or do to make this stop happening? Or is
>>>this a sign of things to come (possible corruption, etc?)
>
>
> Well, the original error sounds like a disk drive lossage ... you might
> want to think about replacing that drive sometime soon, before it drops
> data from someplace more critical than an index.
>
> In the meantime, look through the pg_proc.prolang column for entries
> that don't match the OID of any row in pg_language.  Probably you
> could just UPDATE the ones that are wrong to make them match the OIDs
> of the new rows.  I'd suggest a dump and restore of the database
> after you think you have it right, just to make sure everything
> is sane and to get pg_depend back in sync.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the tips. I tried to match up pg_proc.prolang and _any_ OID in the
pg_language table. There were NO matches at all. This seemed a bit odd, so I
checked an other db and that one had virtually the same numbers (and they didn't
match either).

=# select distinct prolang from pg_proc;
  prolang
---------
       12
       13
       14
    17813
    63209
    63212
    63213
    63214
(8 rows)

=# select * from pg_language ;
  lanname  | lanispl | lanpltrusted | lanplcallfoid | lanvalidator |    lanacl
----------+---------+--------------+---------------+--------------+---------------
  plpgsql  | t       | t            |         17811 |        17812 |
  internal | f       | f            |             0 |         2246 |
  c        | f       | f            |             0 |         2247 |
  plperlu  | t       | f            |         17808 |            0 |
  sql      | f       | t            |             0 |         2248 | {=U/postgres}
  plperl   | t       | t            |         17808 |            0 |
(6 rows)

Is it possible that I am misreading the output or your suggestion?

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Mark Greenbank
Дата:
Сообщение: dblinks?
Следующее
От: Bill Moran
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Questions regarding interaction of stored functions