Re: ERROR: XX000: cache lookup failed for relation

Hi Jan,

Is that still true for 1.2.12? As that's the version I'm using.. Also any ideas on where I start to sort it out? I just want to drop the old table now I've removed it from replication, but the error mentioned previously is stopping me.

Thanks

----- Original Message ----
> From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
> To: Glyn Astill <glynastill(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk>
> Cc: slony1-general(at)lists(dot)slony(dot)info; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Sent: Saturday, 5 April, 2008 3:00:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [Slony1-general] ERROR: XX000: cache lookup failed for relation
>
> On 4/5/2008 7:47 AM, Glyn Astill wrote:
> > Hi chaps,
> >
> > I know there's been a bit of "activity" on this listrecently - but does anyone
> know where I should start looking to resolvethe below?
>
> Yes, a "SET DROP TABLE" is mandatory prior to dropping the table itself.
> This is because up to version 1.2.x, Slony is deliberately corrupting
> the system catalog on subscriber nodes in order to suppress triggers and
> rules to fire (this can only be controlled by other means since Postgres
> 8.3 and will be done so in Slony 2.0).
>
>
> Jan
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Glyn Astill
> >> To: slony1-general(at)lists(dot)slony(dot)info
> >> Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> >> Sent: Friday, 4 April, 2008 3:05:18 PM
> >> Subject: [Slony1-general] ERROR: XX000: cache lookup failed for relation
> >>
> >> Hi chaps,
> >>
> >> I've got a problem trying to drop a table, I get the error "cache lookup
> failed
> >> for relation"
> >>
> >> SEE=# drop table replicated_users;
> >> ERROR: XX000: cache lookup failed for relation 30554884
> >> LOCATION: getRelationDescription, dependency.c:2021
> >> Now this table is on a slony-I slave and was in replication when I tried to
> drop
> >> it - I presume this is a big mistake and I should never try to drop a table
> >> without first droping it from replication?
> >>
> >> In addition I'd set up a trigger on the table "replicate_users".
> >>
> >> If I do:
> >>
> >> select relname,oid from pg_class where relname = 'replicated_users';
> >>
> >> -[ RECORD 1 ]-------------
> >> relname | replicated_users
> >> oid | 30554879
> >>
> >> Thats not the same oid as the one it's complaining about.
> >>
> >> Does anyone have any idea why this has happened or how I can fix it?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Glyn
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___________________________________________________________
> >> Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference
> >>
> >> http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Slony1-general mailing list
> >> Slony1-general(at)lists(dot)slony(dot)info
> >> http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________________________________
> > Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference
> >
> > http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Slony1-general mailing list
> > Slony1-general(at)lists(dot)slony(dot)info
> > http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
>
>
> --
> Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither
> liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin
>
>

___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference

http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/