Re: [HACKERS] Sequence nexvtal() and initdb/pg_proc problem
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Sequence nexvtal() and initdb/pg_proc problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 27897.927497774@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Sequence nexvtal() and initdb/pg_proc problem (Ole Gjerde <gjerde@icebox.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Sequence nexvtal() and initdb/pg_proc problem
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Ole Gjerde <gjerde@icebox.org> writes: > CREATE SEQUENCE "cagedata_id_seq" start 165437 increment 1 maxvalue 2147483647 minvalue 1 cache 1 ; > SELECT nextval ('cagedata_id_seq'); > ERROR: No such function 'nextval' with the specified attributes Can't duplicate that here --- but it might well be related to your busted pg_proc table ... > I also just ran initdb on a clean install, and pg_proc.1 and > pg_proc_proname_narg_type_index.1 gets put in /home/postgres as well as in > /home/postgres/data/base/template1 Hmm, it sounds like something is being sloppy about attaching the full database path to the names of relation extension files. During normal backend operation, the backend is cd'd into the database directory, so it doesn't really matter whether you prepend the path or not. But evidently that's not always true during initdb. You must be running with a very low value of RELSEG_SIZE to have precipitated such a problem, however. Reasonable fixes would be either to force the appropriate cd during initdb, or to find and fix the place that's touching extension segments using a relative pathname. But I can't get excited about spending much time on it, since the problem will never arise at realistic RELSEG_SIZE settings... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: