On 2013-04-01 19:51:19 -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Patch attached. Only brief testing done, so I might have missed
> >> something. I will look more closely later.
> > After applying your patch, I could run the stress test described here:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-02/msg01227.php
> > But altered to make use of initdb -k, of course.
> > Over 10,000 cycles of crash and recovery, I encountered two cases of
> > checksum failures after recovery, example:
> > ...
> > Unfortunately I already cleaned up the data directory before noticing the
> > problem, so I have nothing to post for forensic analysis. I'll try to
> > reproduce the problem.
> I've reproduced the problem, this time in block 74 of relation
> base/16384/4931589, and a tarball of the data directory is here:
> (the table is in database jjanes under role jjanes, the binary is commit
> What I would probably really want is the data as it existed after the crash
> but before recovery started, but since the postmaster immediately starts
> recovery after the crash, I don't know of a good way to capture this.
> I guess one thing to do would be to extract from the WAL the most recent
> FPW for block 74 of relation base/16384/4931589 (assuming it hasn't been
> recycled already) and see if it matches what is actually in that block of
> that data file, but I don't currently know how to do that.
> 11500 SELECT 2013-04-01 12:01:56.926 PDT:WARNING: page verification
> failed, calculated checksum 54570 but expected 34212
> 11500 SELECT 2013-04-01 12:01:56.926 PDT:ERROR: invalid page in block 74
> of relation base/16384/4931589
> 11500 SELECT 2013-04-01 12:01:56.926 PDT:STATEMENT: select sum(count) from
I just checked and unfortunately your dump doesn't contain all that much
rmgr: XLOG len (rec/tot): 72/ 104, tx: 0, lsn: 7/AB000028, prev 7/AA000090, bkp: 0000, desc: checkpoint: redo 7/AB000028; tli 1; prev tli 1; fpw true; xid 0/156747297; oid 4939781; multi 1; offset 0; oldest xid 1799 in DB 1; oldest multi 1 in DB 1; oldest running xid 0; online
rmgr: XLOG len (rec/tot): 72/ 104, tx: 0, lsn: 7/AB000090, prev 7/AB000028, bkp: 0000, desc: checkpoint: redo 7/AB000090; tli 1; prev tli 1; fpw true; xid 0/156747297; oid 4939781; multi 1; offset 0; oldest xid 1799 in DB 1; oldest multi 1 in DB 1; oldest running xid 0; shutdown
pg_xlogdump: FATAL: error in WAL record at 7/AB000090: record with zero length at 7/AB0000F8
So just two checkpoint records.
Unfortunately I fear that won't be enough to diagnose the problem,
could you reproduce it with a higher wal_keep_segments?
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Albe Laurenz||Date: 2013-04-03 09:37:46|
|Subject: Re: CREATE EXTENSION BLOCKS|
|Previous:||From: Alexander Korotkov||Date: 2013-04-03 09:18:27|
|Subject: Re: WIP: index support for regexp search|