| From: | Marc Munro <marc(at)bloodnok(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Index corruption |
| Date: | 2006-06-29 20:17:20 |
| Message-ID: | 1151612240.3913.42.camel@bloodnok.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
We have reproduced the problem again. This time it looks like vacuum is
not part of the picture. From the provider's log:
2006-06-29 14:02:41 CST DEBUG2 cleanupThread: 101.057 seconds for vacuuming
And from the subscriber's:
2006-06-29 13:00:43 PDT ERROR remoteWorkerThread_1: "insert into "public"."table_trans_attribute" (table_transaction_id,attribute_type,value) values ('374740387','22008','4000');
If my maths is correct and the logs are honest, the vacuum would have
started at 14:01:00 CST (13:01:PDT), about 20 seconds after we first
encounter the problem. The clocks on the two machines, though in
different timezones, are currently synced.
Tom, I will create another tarball of the sl_log_1 table and indexes.
Should be quite a bit smaller than the previous one.
__
Marc
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-06-29 20:22:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Some questions to developers |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-06-29 19:46:21 | Re: Single Index Tuple Chain (SITC) method |