The definition of the View refers to just "Acquisitions".
Glen
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 03:20:51PM -0500, Igor Neyman wrote:
> Why wouldn't you look at the definition of the view which is based on
> this table (and which you claim is still working), and how it references
> basic table?
> M.b. it'll point you to the actual table location.
>
> Igor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Glen W. Mabey
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 12:01 PM
> To: Tom Lane
> Cc: PostgreSQL Admin Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] problem upgrading from 8.1.6 to 8.1.8 --- relation
> <tablename> does not exist
>
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 11:41:23AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Glen W. Mabey" <Glen.Mabey@swri.org> writes:
> > > When I SELECT any records from a certain table ("Acquisitions"), I
> get:
> >
> > > acqlibdb=> select * from "Acquisitions";
> > > ERROR: relation "Acquisitions" does not exist
> > > acqlibdb=> select * from public."Acquisitions";
> > > ERROR: relation "public.Acquisitions" does not exist
> >
> > Maybe it's not in the public schema but some other one (implying you
> > forgot about a nondefault search_path setting).
>
> Humm. I don't think so, since I've never altered the search_path
> settings, nor used any schema besides public. And I've been working
> with this database for 8 months now without ever encountering such an
> error. And all of the other tables work just fine.
>
> Is there some way to force an integrity check of the entire database?
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> Glen
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
