| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Nandakumar M <m(dot)nanda92(at)gmail(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rows violating Foreign key constraint exists |
| Date: | 2019-11-29 19:18:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzkCUMSjLtPFO2NscAzqoJVYiOvycQXAaShdZHy=EUUs1A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 7:23 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The most likely "corruption" explanation is something wrong with the
> indexes on the referenced and/or referencing column, causing rows to
> not be found when referential actions should have found them. Random
> querying of the tables wouldn't necessarily expose that --- you'd need
> to be sure that your queries use the questionable indexes, and maybe
> even search for some of the specific rows that seem mis-indexed.
Or try using contrib/amcheck, which is available in Postgres 10.
Perhaps try the query here, modified to verify all B-Tree indexes (not
just those indexes in the pg_catalog schema):
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/amcheck.html
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Farber | 2019-11-29 19:47:50 | Re: Counting booleans in GROUP BY sections |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2019-11-29 17:45:33 | Re: Counting booleans in GROUP BY sections |