| From: | Neil Best <nbest(at)ci(dot)uchicago(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] \copy: unexpected response (4) |
| Date: | 2009-08-14 18:31:44 |
| Message-ID: | 24976506.post@talk.nabble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane-2 wrote:
>
> Sorry, I meant to ask whether the *failure* was repeatable.
>
Oh, I see. Well, to the extent that i had the same problem in two different
remote clients before finding that the local connection work-around made it
go away, I would say that it was repeatable. In short, it happened more
than once and was not intermittent, as far as I could tell. Does that help?
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%5Ccopy%3A-unexpected-response-%284%29-tp24866027p24976506.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John R Pierce | 2009-08-14 18:36:03 | Re: Proxy for postgres |
| Previous Message | Martin Spinassi | 2009-08-14 18:24:13 | Re: Proxy for postgres |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-14 18:37:24 | Re: freezing tuples ( was: Why is vacuum_freeze_min_age 100m? ) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-14 18:04:07 | Re: [HACKERS] \copy: unexpected response (4) |