[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-performance
Subject:    Re: [PERFORM] System tables screwed up? (WAS requested shared memory size overflows size_t)
From:       Alvaro Herrera <alvherre () commandprompt ! com>
Date:       2010-06-24 23:55:01
Message-ID: 1277423407-sup-289 () alvh ! no-ip ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Excerpts from Craig James's message of jue jun 24 19:24:44 -0400 2010:
> On 6/24/10 4:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Excerpts from Craig James's message of jue jun 24 19:03:00 -0400 2010:
> > 
> > > select relname, pg_relation_size(relname) from pg_class
> > > where pg_get_userbyid(relowner) = 'emol_warehouse_1'
> > > and relname not like 'pg_%'
> > > order by pg_relation_size(relname) desc;
> > > ERROR:  relation "rownum_temp" does not exist
> > > 
> > > emol_warehouse_1=>  select relname from pg_class where relname = 'rownum_temp';
> > > relname
> > > ----------------------
> > > rownum_temp
> > > (1 row)
> > 
> > What's the full row?  I'd just add a "WHERE relkind = 'r'" to the above
> > query anyway.
> 
> Thanks, in fact that works.  But my concern is that these are system tables and \
> system functions and yet they seem to be confused.  I've used this query dozens of \
> times and never seen this behavior before.  It makes me really nervous...

I think you're being bitten by lack of schema qualification.  Perhaps
you ought to pass pg_class.oid to pg_relation_size instead of relname.
What did you do to make pg_relation_size to work on type name?

Why is this a -performance question anyway?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]