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

Re: PANIC: failed to re-find parent key in "100924" for split pages 1606/1673

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: valiouk(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PANIC: failed to re-find parent key in "100924" for split pages 1606/1673
Date: 2009-01-08 20:04:45
Message-ID: 26683.1231445085@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 14:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If the btree in question is a critical system index, your value of
>> "work" is going to be pretty damn small.

> So if its a system index we can throw a PANIC, else just LOG. Whilst a
> corrupt index is annoying in the extreme, a total server outage is not
> something we should allow. IMHO.

I think an appropriate solution would be to institute some mechanism
that forces a reindex of the corrupted index at completion of recovery.
Merely fooling around with message severity levels doesn't fix anything
at all, it just opens the door to more trouble than you've already got.

Whether this is important enough to get done in the near future is
a different discussion...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2009-01-08 20:09:54
Subject: Re: BUG #4494: Memory leak in pg_regress.c
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2009-01-08 19:38:06
Subject: Re: PANIC: failed to re-find parent key in "100924" forsplit pages 1606/1673

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