-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
(Jeff Davis: I've not changed the function, so it's not the plan cache)
Tom Lane wrote:
> Does the mentioned OID actually correspond to the OID of the table it's
> supposed to be opening, or is it wrong? Is anything being done to
> the table schema in parallel?
Yes, it is the correct OID. No, nothing done to the schema in parallel,
although there is a process that disables/re-enables triggers and rules
on that table via pg_class tweaking (inside a txn, of course).
> If the table is occasionally dropped and recreated...
Yeah, that's the first thing I thought of, but it's definitely not
being dropped and recreated.
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> It would help if you could get a stack trace at the moment of the
>> problem, but I'm not sure how to do that.
> Perhaps insert an abort() call right before the elog(ERROR)
> that's reporting this. (I think there are three possibilities,
> but they're all in heapam.c so you might as well just hack them all.)
Argh, that will have to be a last resort measure, as this is a
production system. Have not been able to duplicate yet on a dev
box, but will look into adding the abort() for when/if I can
duplicate it there. Thanks everyone.
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200612201412
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2006-12-20 19:19:21|
|Subject: Re: Rare corruption of pg_class index|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2006-12-20 19:15:43|
|Subject: Re: Release 8.2.0 done, 8.3 development starts|