From: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: missing chunk number 0 for toast value |
Date: | 2005-04-27 23:16:38 |
Message-ID: | 200504271716.38630.pgsql@bluepolka.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wednesday April 27 2005 4:40 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Ed L." <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> writes:
> > On Wednesday April 27 2005 3:55 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Have you tried REINDEXing the toast table in question?
> >
> > Not yet. Any way to repair it without blocking concurrent
> > access?
>
> Unlikely. But the lock will only affect operations that need
> to touch toasted field values.
Does this shed any light? pg_toast_6221538 is the relevant toast
table...
$ psql -c "set enable_indexscan=off; select chunk_seq,
length(chunk_data) from pg_toast.pg_toast_6221538 where chunk_id
= 19319495 order by chunk_seq;"
chunk_seq | length
-----------+--------
(0 rows)
$ psql -c "select chunk_seq, length(chunk_data) from
pg_toast.pg_toast_6221538 where chunk_id = 19319495 order by
chunk_seq;"
chunk_seq | length
-----------+--------
(0 rows)
Ed
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-28 00:11:29 | Re: missing chunk number 0 for toast value |
Previous Message | Typing80wpm | 2005-04-27 23:10:26 | Free rekall for Postgresql |