You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2021. It is now read-only.
Reporter: david[at]frankieandshadow.com [Submitted to the original trac issue database at 11.14pm, Tuesday, 29th May 2007]
Oh dear, the planet file for May 30, 2007 contains two pairs of duplicate segments: they have the same id. Surely id's are unique, yes? Isn't that the point? It doesn't look like they are new, but it wasn't like this last week or I'd have noticed.
Is this just a problem generating the planet file, or indicative of an underlying data integrity problem?
(There may be other duplicated, but my planet processing program crashed trying to do an insert on a duplicate primary key)
Excerpt below... 18591604 and 18591605 are the culprits, and this is a contiguous section of the file.
(Also, note that 18591606 doesn't have any useful tags and 18591607 is empty.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Author: tom[at]compton.nu [Added to the original trac issue at 11.28am, Sunday, 19th August 2007]
This should now be impossible as there is now a primary key on the segment ID in the database, and various bugs in the API that could previously have allowed this happen have now been fixed.
Reporter: david[at]frankieandshadow.com
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 11.14pm, Tuesday, 29th May 2007]
Oh dear, the planet file for May 30, 2007 contains two pairs of duplicate segments: they have the same id. Surely id's are unique, yes? Isn't that the point? It doesn't look like they are new, but it wasn't like this last week or I'd have noticed.
Is this just a problem generating the planet file, or indicative of an underlying data integrity problem?
(There may be other duplicated, but my planet processing program crashed trying to do an insert on a duplicate primary key)
Excerpt below... 18591604 and 18591605 are the culprits, and this is a contiguous section of the file.
(Also, note that 18591606 doesn't have any useful tags and 18591607 is empty.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: