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

Re: TOAST versus VACUUM, or "missing chunk number 0 for toast value" identified

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Hammond <andrew(dot)george(dot)hammond(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: TOAST versus VACUUM, or "missing chunk number 0 for toast value" identified
Date: 2011-10-28 20:11:54
Message-ID: 29101.1319832714@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of vie oct 28 16:47:13 -0300 2011:
>> BTW we had previous discussions about dropping pg_database's toast
>> table.  Maybe this is a good time to do it, even if there's no risk of
>> this bug (or the hypothetical circularity detoasting problem) showing up
>> there.

No objection from me.

> Oh, something unrelated I just remembered: we have
> pg_database.datlastsysoid which seems unused.  Perhaps we should remove
> that column for cleanliness.

I have a vague recollection that some client-side code uses this to
figure out what's the dividing line between user and system OIDs.
pg_dump used to need to know that number, and it can still be useful
with casts and other things that are hard to tell whether they're built-in.
While in principle people could use FirstNormalObjectId instead, that
could come back to bite us if we ever have to increase that constant
in future releases.  I'm inclined to leave this one alone.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andres FreundDate: 2011-10-28 20:22:01
Subject: Re: fstat vs. lseek
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2011-10-28 20:07:55
Subject: Re: So where are we on the open commitfest?

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