I think someone changed the database schema. Try cvs update then
initdb. Could it be that the row of type circle is causing it?
I don't get that here, and 719 is certainly a strange number to be
getting
> ... yeah, me neither.
>
> Hi all, I have an interesting one for you today. I'm writing a new \dd
> command (one that actually works), and I have come across the following
> situation:
>
> SELECT DISTINCT a.aggname as "Name" FROM pg_aggregate a
> UNION ALL
> SELECT DISTINCT p.proname as "Name" FROM pg_proc p
> UNION ALL
> SELECT DISTINCT o.oprname as "Name" FROM pg_operator o
> UNION ALL
> SELECT DISTINCT t.typname as "Name" FROM pg_type t
> UNION ALL
> SELECT DISTINCT c.relname as "Name" FROM pg_class c
> ;
>
> (It doesn't make much sense as it stands, but I have picked out the
> offending parts.)
>
> I get
> NOTICE: equal: don't know whether nodes of type 719 are equal
>
> Actually, I get several of these. Depending on the number of select
> clauses, I get 1 for the third, 2 for the 4th, 3 for the 5th, etc. So the
> above query gives me 6 notices. A query with only two select clauses gives
> me none.
>
> Without the DISTINCTs everything goes fine.
>
> Now this seems to have something to do with a lack of an equal operator
> for the type "name", right? Interestingly enough, the type name has oid
> 19, whereas type 719 is "_circle", or what does the 719 refer to?
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
> peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala
> http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
>
>
>
> ************
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
