Re: FATAL 1: Relation 'pg_shadow' does not exist - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jan Wieck
Subject Re: FATAL 1: Relation 'pg_shadow' does not exist
Date
Msg-id 200201152124.g0FLOVS28969@saturn.janwieck.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FATAL 1: Relation 'pg_shadow' does not exist  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: FATAL 1: Relation 'pg_shadow' does not exist  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au> writes:
> > When I first brought it down, I attempted this, but forgot -O. I've just
> > done this, however, it connected fine. Moreover, a select * from
> > pg_shadow; returned results! I vacuumed and brought the database back
> > online -- everything fine.
>
> > Extremely strange =\.
>
> Did I read you correctly to say that you're still on 7.1?
>
> This episode should convince you to update to 7.1.3, pronto.
> We don't make dot-releases for amusement value.
>
> (No, I can't cite any particular bug that might've led to this.)
   IIRC  there  was  this  cross  DB  shared  buffer  usage  bug   somewhere in 7.1, that used blocks from another DB
found by   accident  in  the  cache.   So  it all must have been a cache   problem  and  the  postmaster  restart
fix^H^H^H  made   it   disappear and lurk again.
 
   That  bug  can  corrupt  the  system  catalogs  of  all  your   databases!  Upgrade NOW!


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hiroshi Inoue"
Date:
Subject: Re: again on index usage
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: FATAL 1: Relation 'pg_shadow' does not exist