From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Kamigishi Rei <iijima(dot)yun(at)koumakan(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #17245: Index corruption involving deduplicated entries |
Date: | 2021-10-29 18:50:32 |
Message-ID: | 202110291850.cxcsg7j7ye6r@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 2021-Oct-29, Kamigishi Rei wrote:
> The weird part about this is that the WAL archive does not seem to contain
> any data for 157 and 158 above (in 1663/19243/274869 blk 17). The last two
> entries are
>
> rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 53/ 4885, tx: 2085600, lsn:
> 2/A0195AE0, prev 2/A01943F0, desc: INSERT_LEAF off 155, blkref #0: rel
> 1663/19243/274869 blk 17 FPW
> rmgr: Btree len (rec/tot): 72/ 72, tx: 2085602, lsn:
> 2/A019DD30, prev 2/A019DCF0, desc: INSERT_LEAF off 156, blkref #0: rel
> 1663/19243/274869 blk 17
>
> The WAL file in data14/pg_wal does not have anything related to 157 and 158
> for this filenode/blk as well.
Hmm, I don't remember precisely how index tuple removal works, but maybe
these 157 and 158 entries existed previously and were truncated away.
It might be useful to have a look at the page header in the page image
contained in the FPW for 2/A0195AE0.
pg_waldump doesn't do it, but I have this patch sitting around ...
probably outdated, but it may be a useful starting point for somebody.
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
waldump-save-fpi.patch | text/x-diff | 2.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-10-29 18:52:02 | Re: BUG #17245: Index corruption involving deduplicated entries |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2021-10-29 18:47:57 | Re: BUG #17258: Unexpected results in CHAR(1) data type |