| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bryan Murphy <bmurphy1976(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ERROR: attempted to delete invisible tuple |
| Date: | 2009-08-17 17:17:08 |
| Message-ID: | 3721.1250529428@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bryan Murphy <bmurphy1976(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Here's the xmin/xmax/ctid for three problematic records:
> prodpublic=# select xmin,xmax,ctid from items_extended where id in
> ('34537ed90d7546d78f2c172fc8eed687', '3e1d99b7124742b7aaf2f869f7637b0e',
> '499b464f141a48619c5ce0475cbe9150');
> xmin | xmax | ctid
> -----------+-----------+------------
> 262232659 | 308810030 | (689496,3)
> 262629744 | 308810034 | (692765,1)
> 262643188 | 308810035 | (692920,9)
> (3 rows)
Hm, what's your current XID counter? (pg_controldata would give an
approximate answer.) I'm wondering if the xmax's are marked committed
but are in the future ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bryan Murphy | 2009-08-17 17:20:27 | Re: ERROR: attempted to delete invisible tuple |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-08-17 17:09:33 | Re: pg_autovacuum exceptions question |