Re: vacuumdb is failing with NUMBER OF INDEX TUPLES NOT THE SAME AS HEAP

On Wed, 05 May 2004 13:56:41 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Lonni Friedman <netllama(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:31:21 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Once the complaint starts appearing, I'd expect it to continue until you
> >> reindex the index.
>
> > That's exactly what happens. It consistantly errors until reindexed.
> > Any suggestions? thanks.
>
> You are seemingly triggering some sort of bug in the backend's
> large-object code, causing extra index entries to be made ...
> but I sure haven't the foggiest idea how that would happen.
>
> Perhaps you could look at the parts of your application code that work
> with large objects and see if you are doing anything "off the beaten
> track" that might suggest a way to trigger the bug reproducibly.
> I'm sure we could fix it if we could see it happening.

hrmmm, i'm not sure what would constitute 'off the beaten track'. is
there something specific that i could look for? or what is considered
to be normal?

I can tell you that the large objects that are getting chucked into
the database are generally under 1MB in size (each), as they're mostly
M$ documents. There are a few that are between 1MB & 10MB but I don't
think there's anything larger than 10MB.