Re: Multiple table entries?

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jeff Ross <jross(at)wykids(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multiple table entries?
Date: 2009-08-24 12:02:34
Message-ID: 407d949e0908240502t2d6cc7e2s4f89bb264a37dfa8@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jeff Ross <jross(at)wykids(dot)org> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> heap_update is broken.  Details left as an exercise for the reader
>
>> Well, as the reader that started this all ;-) should I be worried?
>> Should I do a pg_dump and reinstall?  Roll back to 8.3.7?  Or just
>> relax, don't worry and have a sparkling adult beverage?
>
> Well, it's a pretty bad bug but as far as I can see a simple "VACUUM
> table" command should fix it up --- would you confirm?

At the very least taking regular pg_dumps is probably wise. That's
probably wise even if there aren't Postges bugs though since it's the
most flexible type of backup to deal with application bugs with.

The answer to whether you should roll back until 8.4.1 comes out will
depend on how valuable your data is, how critical the downtime to
repair any corruption would be, versus the time that you'll spend on
rolling it back. That's a complicated calculus which will be different
for every user.

The bug found should only affect recovery though. So unless you have a
standby slave database or have postgres or system crashes it shouldn't
be relevant.

--
greg
http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message dev mas 2009-08-24 14:19:34 unsubscribe
Previous Message Sam Mason 2009-08-24 11:26:02 Re: how to return field based on field= NULL or not