Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 8.4.0 data loss / HOT-related bug

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Radoslaw Zielinski <radek(at)pld-linux(dot)org>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 8.4.0 data loss / HOT-related bug
Date: 2009-08-21 16:17:26
Message-ID: 20090821161726.GF5487@alvh.no-ip.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Greg Stark wrote:

> It looks like the row *was* updated by transaction 6179 and the new
> version was stored in line pointer 12. However  it's marked
> XMAX_INVALID which means at least somebody at some point thought 6179
> had aborted and marked that hint bit.

Hmm, but LP 12 shouldn't have len=0 then, no?  Unless it has been
clobbered by vacuum or HOT pruning, I guess ...

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Sebastien LardiereDate: 2009-08-21 16:26:11
Subject: BUG #5004: pg_freespacemap make a SegFault
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2009-08-21 16:15:26
Subject: Re: 8.4.0 data loss / HOT-related bug

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group