Re: BUG #7562: could not read block 0 in file "base/16385/16585": read only 0 of 8192 bytes

Hello Tom, Thanks for the information. But problem is it is occurring quite frequently in my case.
Regards,
Mayank Mittal

> From: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
> To: mayank(dot)mittal(dot)1982(at)hotmail(dot)com
> CC: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7562: could not read block 0 in file "base/16385/16585": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:15:17 -0400
>
> mayank(dot)mittal(dot)1982(at)hotmail(dot)com writes:
> > The following bug has been logged on the website:
> > Bug reference: 7562
> > Logged by: Mayank Mittal
> > Email address: mayank(dot)mittal(dot)1982(at)hotmail(dot)com
> > PostgreSQL version: 9.1.5
> > Operating system: Debian Linux 6.0
> > Description:
>
> > We are using 2 node set-up of PostgreSQL 9.1.5 in which one is master and
> > other is slave which is in sync of master with streaming replication.
> > The design is in such a way that in case of master node failure the slave
> > node has to take master role. I'm controlling this behaviour using Corosync
> > and Heartbeat.
> > My application is requirement needs heavy database updates. Upon fail-over
> > I've noticed that database indexes got corrupted.
>
> Hmm. There is a fix for a slave-side-index-corruption problem in 9.1.6,
> which is due to be announced Monday. I am not certain whether this is
> the same thing though; that bug is low-probability as far as we can
> tell (it would only happen if the master had been in the middle of an
> index page split or page deletion at the instant of failover). Anyway
> the first thing to find out is whether 9.1.6 fixes it.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs