| From: | Evgeny Morozov <postgresql3(at)realityexists(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: "PANIC: could not open critical system index 2662" - twice |
| Date: | 2023-04-13 06:56:45 |
| Message-ID: | 010201877966fc0d-e09f5a0b-e846-417b-b30a-b8d57ac61fa3-000000@eu-west-1.amazonses.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 12/04/2023 2:35 am, Michael Paquier wrote:
> initdb does not enable checksums by default, requiring a
> -k/--data-checksums, so likely this addition comes from from your
> environment.
Indeed, turns out we had it in init_db_options.
> However, the docs say "Only
>> data pages are protected by checksums; internal data structures and
>> temporary files are not.", so I guess pg_class_oid_index might be an
>> "internal data structure"?
> pg_class_oid_index is a btree index that relies on 8k on-disk pages
> (default size), so it is subject to the same rules as normal relations
> regarding checksums for the pages flushed to disk, even if it is on a
> catalog.
OK, so then what does that mean for the error in the subject? At what
point should that problem have been detected by the data checksums?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-04-13 09:31:43 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Previous Message | Mike Bayer | 2023-04-13 04:25:22 | Re: Guidance on INSERT RETURNING order |