From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Ed Loehr <ELOEHR(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com>, pg-gen <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Index pg_proc_prosrc_index: NUMBER OF INDEX' TUPLES (1071)ISNOT THE SAME AS HEAP' (1070) |
Date: | 1999-12-22 08:21:22 |
Message-ID: | 38608A02.A82383C3@mascari.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > > Anyone seen this message or know what it means?
> > > >
> > > > NOTICE: Index pg_proc_prosrc_index: NUMBER OF INDEX' TUPLES (1071) IS
> > > > NOT THE SAME AS HEAP' (1070)
> > >
> > > Drop index and recreate. Next release will be more specific in error
> > > message.
> >
> > I have no idea *which* index to drop/recreate, and I have hundreds of them.
> > Ouch.
>
> That will also be fixed.
I thought that the index in question was, in fact,
pg_proc_prosrc_index in the above example. If that's the
case, then is it possible for Ed to rebuild a system index?
The only absolutely surefire way is to dump/reload, isn't
it? Maybe somewhere someone is doing a heap_insert(),
heap_replace(), et al, and an event is happening which is
causing the code to not get to the
CatalogOpenIndices()/CatalogIndexInsert()/CatalogCloseIndices()...
Just curious,
Mike Mascari
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mike Mascari | 1999-12-22 08:29:59 | Re: [GENERAL] item descriptions in psql |
Previous Message | Kevin Lo | 1999-12-22 08:03:29 | Re: [INTERFACES] Announce: PostgreSQL-6.5.3 binaries available forWindows NT |