Re: [HACKERS] Index corruption

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Adriaan Joubert <a(dot)joubert(at)albourne(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Index corruption
Date: 1999-12-29 16:01:36
Message-ID: 4044.946483296@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

pg_proc_prosrc_index is the problem, eh? I'll bet a nickel that you're
seeing still another manifestation of btree's problems with oversized
index entries. (See recent thread 'Error "vacuum pg_proc"'.)

Check to see if you have any functions whose definitions exceed 2700
bytes, eg with
select proname from pg_proc where length(prosrc) > 2700;
If so, you need to rewrite them to be smaller, perhaps by breaking
them into multiple functions.

7.0 should fix this problem, but it's a real hazard in 6.5.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1999-12-29 16:07:26 Re: subquery performance and EXISTS
Previous Message Tom Lane 1999-12-29 15:47:06 Re: [SQL] Index scan on CIDR field ?