Reply-To: <gnanam@zoniac.com>
From: "Gnanakumar" <gnanam@zoniac.com>
To: "'Kevin Grittner'" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>,
	<pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
References: <006d01cbdfd5$f48becb0$dda3c610$@com>
	<4D7DEB6B020000250003B821@gw.wicourts.gov>
In-Reply-To: <4D7DEB6B020000250003B821@gw.wicourts.gov>
Subject: Re: PSQLException: ERROR: could not open relation with	 OID xxxx
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:38:07 +0530
Organization: Zoniac Software Private Limited
Message-ID: <003601cbe2df$bf0c7480$3d255d80$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: AcviWxkHTR6XI1C7QXK7q2MqxChUoAAgvQqQ
Content-Language: en-us

> Clearly it's trying to use an OID it calculated for one of these
> tables after the table has been dropped, and I suspect that the lock
> is released between gathering the data and sorting it.  I don't have
> any 8.2 databases around to try this on, but perhaps you would avoid
> it with a slight rearrangement of your monitoring query:

Thanks for both making this clear and providing an rearranged/modified
version of my original query.  I'll try out this option also.

> If that doesn't do it I might try adding zero to numbers and
> concatenating empty strings to try to prevent late use of the OID. 
> (Essentially as a form of optimization barrier.)

I couldn't understand this approach clearly. Can you help explain me with
some example?