> Ah, I see why the data-directory interlock file wasn't helping: it
> wasn't checked until *after* shared memory was set up (read clobbered
> :-(). This was not a very bright choice. I'm still surprised that
> the shared-memory reset should've trashed your database so thoroughly,
> though.
>
> Over the past two days I've committed changes that should make the
> data directory, socket file, and shared memory interlocks considerably
> more robust. In particular, mechanically doing "rm -f
> /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432" should never be necessary anymore.
That's fantastic. Thanks for the quick fix.
> BTW, your original message mentioned something about a recursive view
> definition that wasn't being recognized as such. Could you provide
> details on that?
I can't. It's a few weeks ago, the database has been in furious
development, and, of course, I didn't bother to save all those views
that crashed my server. I keep trying to re-create it, but can't
figure it out. I'm sorry.
I think it wasn't just two views pointing at each other (it would, of
course, be next to impossible to even create those, unless you hand
tweaked the system tables), but I think was a view-relies-on-a-
function-relies-on-a-view kind of problem. If I ever see it again, I'll
save it.
Thanks!
--
Joel Burton, Director of Information Systems -*- jburton@scw.org
Support Center of Washington (www.scw.org)
