Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- From: David Schanen <mtv(at)ibm(dot)net>
- To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
- Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, prod_dev(at)natrindo(dot)co(dot)id, miker(at)scifair(dot)acadiau(dot)ca
- Subject: Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:55:17 -0700
- Message-id: <358F97A5.F4AED25@ibm.net> <text/plain>
The Hermit Hacker wrote: > On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, David Schanen wrote: > > > Hi Marc & Mike, > > > > Looking at the backtrace from the debug.core It seems to me like we are > > still getting the BTP_CHAIN errors we saw in previous versions. > > You are using v6.3.2+patches currently? Actually, we are using the basic 6.3.2, no patches applied yet. I'll look into that. Is this a known bug fix in the current patch release? -Dave
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- From: The Hermit Hacker
- Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- References:
- Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- From: The Hermit Hacker
- Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- Prev by Date: Divide by zero error on SPARC/Linux.
- Next by Date: Re: [HACKERS] Divide by zero error on SPARC/Linux.
- Previous by thread: Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- Next by thread: Re: btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected (revisited)
- Indexes: