From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Natalie Wenz <nataliewenz(at)ebureau(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and frozen xids |
Date: | 2018-03-07 20:11:15 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzk0JFt84vH8m9_AbV7-yGVSedCQ2c8aypP64c_tyJCfag@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Natalie Wenz <nataliewenz(at)ebureau(dot)com> wrote:
> They are not, unfortunately (fortunately?). Just a standard table.
>
> If it helps, the autovacuum always seems to be in the phase "cleaning up
> indexes" when I look at pg_stat_progress_vacuum.
It sounds like it might be a good idea for you to run amcheck on
affected indexes:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/amcheck.html
If that doesn't show any issue, you might then use the Github
version's extra "heapallindexed" test on the same indexes:
https://github.com/petergeoghegan/amcheck
The extra "heapallindexed" test might allow you to uncover that some
parts of an index are unreachable. Though using
bt_index_parent_check() instead of bt_index_check() may be just as
effective, and should be considered if you can afford to have a lock
that will block writes to the table during verification.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | bricklen | 2018-03-07 20:21:23 | Re: pg_upgrade and frozen xids |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-03-07 20:01:36 | Re: pg_upgrade and frozen xids |