Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: vacuum failure in current sources

vacuum failure in current sources

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk> writes:
> This is with source from yesterday, but I seem to remember the same
> happening to me on 6th January. It used to work before then. I don't
> know where to look!

> % psql template1
> template1=> create database test;
> CREATE DATABASE
> template1=> \c test          
> You are now connected to database test.
> test=> create table atable (x int);
> CREATE
> test=> insert into atable values (1);
> INSERT 558537 1
> test=> vacuum analyze atable;
> NOTICE:  Vacuum: table not found
> VACUUM
> test=> select version();
>                                  version                                 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  PostgreSQL 7.0.0 on i386-unknown-netbsd1.4p, compiled by gcc egcs-1.1.2
> (1 row)

Wow.  It works fine for me.  Platform-specific bug maybe?  Can anyone
else reproduce this?
        regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] vacuum failure in current sources

From
Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
> Patrick Welche <prlw1@newn.cam.ac.uk> writes:
> > This is with source from yesterday, but I seem to remember the same
> > happening to me on 6th January. It used to work before then. I don't
> > know where to look!
> 
> > % psql template1
> > template1=> create database test;
> > CREATE DATABASE
> > template1=> \c test          
> > You are now connected to database test.
> > test=> create table atable (x int);
> > CREATE
> > test=> insert into atable values (1);
> > INSERT 558537 1
> > test=> vacuum analyze atable;
> > NOTICE:  Vacuum: table not found
> > VACUUM
> > test=> select version();
> >                                  version                                 
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  PostgreSQL 7.0.0 on i386-unknown-netbsd1.4p, compiled by gcc egcs-1.1.2
> > (1 row)
> 
> Wow.  It works fine for me.  Platform-specific bug maybe?  Can anyone
> else reproduce this?

I do not see the problem neither. This is RH 5.2.
--
Tatsuo Ishii