RE: strange behaviour (bug)

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Kovacs Zoltan" <kovacsz(at)pc10(dot)radnoti-szeged(dot)sulinet(dot)hu>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: strange behaviour (bug)
Date: 2000-09-12 21:24:38
Message-ID: EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJGEFICEAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane
>
> Kovacs Zoltan <kovacsz(at)pc10(dot)radnoti-szeged(dot)sulinet(dot)hu> writes:
> > now I will get 's' as expected... Dumping the database out and
> bringing it
> > back the problem doesn't appear anymore... for a while... I cannot give
> > an exact report, but usually this bug occurs when I stop the database
> > and I start it again.
>
> Hmm. Is it possible that when you restart the postmaster, you are
> accidentally starting it with a different environment --- in particular,
> different LOCALE or LC_xxx settings --- than it had before?
>
> If there is an index on id_string then
> > select * from foo where id_string = 'something';
> would try to use the index, and so could get messed up by a change
> in LOCALE; the index would now appear to be out of order according to
> the new LOCALE value.
>

There could be another cause.
If a B-tree page A was splitted to the page A(changed) and a page B but
the transaction was rolled back,the pages A,B would not be written to
disc and the followings could occur for example.
1) The changed non-leaf page of A and B may be written to disc later.
2) An index entry may be inserted into the page B and committed later.

I don't know how often those could occur.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2000-09-12 21:32:26 Re: Status of new relation file naming
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-09-12 21:24:34 Re: Status of new relation file naming