Re: [GENERAL] Index pg_proc_prosrc_index: NUMBER OF INDEX' TUPLES (1071)ISNOT THE SAME AS HEAP' (1070)

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ed Loehr <ELOEHR(at)austin(dot)rr(dot)com>
Cc: 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 06:18:59
Message-ID: 199912220618.BAA00473@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> > I think it is harmless. To fix it properly requires a
> > very sophisticated write-ahead log that is scheduled for 7.1 in about
> > six months.
>
> This problem stops my psql dead in its tracks for related queries even across new
> sessions. Requires a rebuild of indices before any queries work with the related
> tables/functions, and since I don't know which one to rebuild (die, horsey, die), I
> might as well rebuild them all. In production mode, that means stopping user access due
> to the possibility of violating unique constraints enforced by unique indices. That
> means downtime, which would makes moi persona non grata. But maybe my assumptions are
> incorrect or I didn't understand what you mean by harmless?

Maybe other people can chime in here. Why are you getting the inital
crashes?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tusar 1999-12-22 06:31:09 Re: [INTERFACES] Announce: PostgreSQL-6.5.3 binaries available for Windows NT
Previous Message Ed Loehr 1999-12-22 06:04:38 Re: [GENERAL] Index pg_proc_prosrc_index: NUMBER OF INDEX' TUPLES (1071)ISNOT THE SAME AS HEAP' (1070)