Re: using index "pg_toast_..." despite IgnoreSystemIndexes

From: Michael Wood <esiotrot(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, lsq(at)nym(dot)hush(dot)com, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: using index "pg_toast_..." despite IgnoreSystemIndexes
Date: 2012-08-29 21:50:55
Message-ID: CAP6d-HVctXZkBOz+KxY+vSTw9Ct5FCvSbXF9PKK2kGuFhh=MfA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice

No, you misread that, but Tom has already replied to his other message.

On 8/29/12, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:33:22AM -0400, lsq(at)nym(dot)hush(dot)com wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> After an upgrade to 8.4.12 from 8.4.10 we vacuum/analyzed the db.
>
> You downgraded a server? Depending on the fixes in minor releases, that
> might not work.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> Postgres is running in standalone mode at this point.
>>
>>
>> vacuumdb --echo --analyze --all --verbose -U sysdba
>>
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 INFO: analyzing
>> "information_schema.sql_features"
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 INFO: "sql_features": scanned 7 of 7 pages,
>> containing 649 live rows and 0 dead rows; 649 rows in sample, 649
>> estimated total rows
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 WARNING: using index "pg_toast_2619_index"
>> despite IgnoreSystemIndexes
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 WARNING: using index "pg_toast_2619_index"
>> despite IgnoreSystemIndexes
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 WARNING: using index "pg_toast_2619_index"
>> despite IgnoreSystemIndexes
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 WARNING: using index "pg_toast_2619_index"
>> despite IgnoreSystemIndexes
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 INFO: vacuuming
>> "information_schema.sql_implementation_info"
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 INFO: "sql_implementation_info": found 0
>> removable, 12 nonremovable row versions in 1 out of 1 pages
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 DETAIL: 0 dead row versions cannot be removed
>> yet.
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 There were 1 unused item pointers.
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 0 pages are entirely empty.
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 CPU 0.00s/0.00u sec elapsed 0.00 sec.
>> 07/31/12 04:09:57 INFO: vacuuming "pg_toast.pg_toast_11452"
>>
>>
>> I see the warning generated in systable_beginscan_ordered as a
>> warning, and then it proceeds to do the work anyway.
>>
>> It appears as if this is benign. Is that the case?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-novice mailing list (pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-novice
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
> EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
>
> + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-novice mailing list (pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-novice
>

--
Michael Wood <esiotrot(at)gmail(dot)com>

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message lsq 2012-08-29 22:09:10 Re: using index "pg_toast_..." despite IgnoreSystemIndexes
Previous Message Abhijeet R 2012-08-29 18:00:32 Re: Batch updates to 1 column using python-pgsql in multiple rows