Re: Relation 0 does not exist - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Patrick Welche
Subject Re: Relation 0 does not exist
Date
Msg-id 20020925222949.E9603@quartz.newn.cam.ac.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Relation 0 does not exist  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Relation 0 does not exist  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 04:52:30PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk> writes:
> > The subject says it all:
> > ERROR:  Relation 0 does not exist
> > LOG:  statement: INSERT INTO trans (meter_id,stats_id,flowindex,firsttime,firstt...
>
> Could we see the *whole* query?  And the schemas of the table(s) it
> uses?  Seems like a bug to me, but without enough context to reproduce
> it I can't do much.

DEBUG:  StartTransactionCommand
DEBUG:  ProcessQuery
ERROR:  Relation 0 does not exist
LOG:  statement: INSERT INTO trans
(meter_id,stats_id,flowindex,firsttime,firsttimed,firsttimet,firsttimei,lasttime,lasttimed,lasttimet,lasttimei,sourcepeeraddress,sourcepeername,sourcetransaddress,destpeeraddress,desttransaddress,sourcetranstype,frompdus,fromoctets,topdus,tooctets,deltafromoctets,deltatooctets)
VALUES(411, currval('stats_id_seq'),5,'08:52:11 Mon 22 Jul 2002'::timestamp without time zone+'5536695.89
second',('08:52:11Mon 22 Jul 2002'::timestamp without time zone+'5536695.89 second')::date,('08:52:11 Mon 22 Jul
2002'::timestampwithout time zone+'5536695.89 second')::time,553669589,'08:52:11 Mon 22 Jul 2002'::timestamp without
timezone+'5660731.53 second',('08:52:11 Mon 22 Jul 2002'::timestamp without time zone+'5660731.53
second')::date,('08:52:11Mon 22 Jul 2002'::timestamp without time zone+'5660731.53
second')::time,566073153,'192.168.3.4','hostname.here.ac.uk',2,'192.168.3.2',53,17,14403,5271978,14419,1226291,507098::bigint,109306::bigint)
DEBUG:  AbortCurrentTransaction
LOG:  pq_recvbuf: unexpected EOF on client connection
DEBUG:  proc_exit(0)



One thing which bugs me: I have a currval in there, and that is the very
first query which reaches the database, so it won't be "set", will it, but
then, how could it have worked for months with the other version of server?
(Source files are old - recompiled just in case postgres header files changed)
Hmm then it would have complained about Relation "stats_id_seq" no?

                      Table "public.trans"
       Column       |              Type              | Modifiers
--------------------+--------------------------------+-----------
 meter_id           | integer                        |
 stats_id           | integer                        |
 flowindex          | integer                        |
 firsttime          | timestamp(6) without time zone |
 firsttimed         | date                           |
 firsttimet         | time(0) without time zone      |
 firsttimei         | integer                        |
 lasttime           | timestamp(6) without time zone |
 lasttimet          | time(0) without time zone      |
 lasttimed          | date                           |
 lasttimei          | integer                        |
 sourcepeeraddress  | inet                           |
 sourcepeername     | text                           |
 sourcetransaddress | integer                        |
 destpeeraddress    | inet                           |
 destpeername       | text                           |
 desttransaddress   | integer                        |
 sourcetranstype    | integer                        |
 frompdus           | integer                        |
 fromoctets         | integer                        |
 topdus             | integer                        |
 tooctets           | integer                        |
 deltafromoctets    | bigint                         |
 deltatooctets      | bigint                         |
 dpndate            | date                           |
 nettype            | integer                        |
Indexes: firsttimei_idx btree (firsttimei),
         srcpeername_idx btree (sourcepeername)
Triggers: RI_ConstraintTrigger_14413070,
          RI_ConstraintTrigger_14413073

Cheers,

Patrick

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Dmitry Tkach
Date:
Subject: Problem with getting sources from CVS...
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] subselect bug (was Re: DBLink: interesting issue)