"Chris White \(cjwhite\)" <cjwhite@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Does this mean it could be any transaction, even one that has not done > anything with large objects, but one that started prior to the large objects > being deleted? Exactly. > All access to the DB is done via JDBC, so has this JDBC issue been fixed in > 7.4.5? You'd have to ask the JDBC guys ... regards, tom lane
