Thread: SOLVED: invalid type error

SOLVED: invalid type error

From
"Johnson, Shaunn"
Date:

--Never mind; I solved it. 

--It had to do with something in pg_type.

--Thanks anyhow.

-X

-----Original Message-----
From: Johnson, Shaunn
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 2:24 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: invalid type error

Howdy:

Running Postgres 7.1.3 on RedHat Linux 7.2.

I don't know what I did, or how I did it, but when I
try to do a pg_dump of a table, I get this message:

[snip]

WARNING: owner of type 'number' appears to be invalid
WARNING: owner of type 'interger' appears to be invalid

[/snip]

I'm thinking that I did the latter one when I was
trying to create a function and I fat-fingered
the name.

Does anyone know how I can get rid of these messages?

TIA!

-X

Re: SOLVED: invalid type error

From
Jan Wieck
Date:
Johnson, Shaunn wrote:
> --Never mind; I solved it.
>
> --It had to do with something in pg_type.

    Just deleted the rows from pg_type?

    If  so,  congrats,  in  this  case  it is one of the possible
    solutions.  In some other cases you might well mess  up  your
    entire  DB's  system  catalog  by shooting around in the pg_*
    tables like that without the advice  of  someone  who  really
    knows what she's doing there.


Jan

--

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



Re: SOLVED: invalid type error

From
"Johnson, Shaunn"
Date:

--Jan:

--don't worry, i wasn't offended; i'm sorry
i didn't wait around for someone to point
me in the right direction.

--and messing around in a system table
that i have very little knowledge of scared
me, too ... i *wanted* to be discouraged.

--what motivated me was something i read
in the groups.google.com comp.databases.postgresql.admin
news group.  someone had a similar problem and it was
pointed out (me thinks by tom lane?) that
there could be bogus value in pg_class,
pg_function, etc ...

--i deleted the function and then the rows
where the typowner was '0' and the names typname
was '<whatever>'.

--from now on i will wait until i get a better
handle on how i butchered the db before i go
guns-a-blazing.

--thanks for the follow up!!

-X

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Wieck [mailto:janwieck@yahoo.com]

Shaunn,

    that  reply  below  wasn't  meant  personal  or  in  any  way
    offending. I more wanted to use it as a chance to  discourage
    people  from manipulating the system catalog in general. This
    is usually a bad idea and since system catalog structures can
    change   from  version  to  version,  what  worked  perfectly
    yesterday could end in a catastrophe tomorrow.

Jan

Jan Wieck wrote:
> Johnson, Shaunn wrote:
> > --Never mind; I solved it.
> >
> > --It had to do with something in pg_type.
>
>     Just deleted the rows from pg_type?
>
>     If  so,  congrats,  in  this  case  it is one of the possible
>     solutions.  In some other cases you might well mess  up  your
>     entire  DB's  system  catalog  by shooting around in the pg_*
>     tables like that without the advice  of  someone  who  really
>     knows what she's doing there.
>
>
> Jan
>