| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #2379: Duplicate pkeys in table |
| Date: | 2006-04-06 16:56:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20060406165629.GF15753@surnet.cl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Philip Warner wrote:
> Item 7 -- Length: 168 Offset: 3920 (0x0f50) Flags: USED
> XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 0 CMAX|XVAC: 32902872
> Block Id: 0 linp Index: 7 Attributes: 34 Size: 36
> infomask: 0x2913
> (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED)
> t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84
> [4]: 0x00
Hmm, shouldn't we see the MOVED_OFF bit set also if the cmax/xvac field
is actually xvac?
> Item 27 -- Length: 168 Offset: 8024 (0x1f58) Flags: USED
> XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 33048159 CMAX|XVAC: 20
> Block Id: 318 linp Index: 6 Attributes: 34 Size: 36
> infomask: 0x2913
> (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED)
> t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84
> [4]: 0x00
I'm confused -- the original report showed this tuple with ctid (72,27),
but this seems to be in a different block?
What's the explanation for this tuple to have cmin=cmax? Is this
normal?
Sorry I have only questions :-(
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-06 17:16:38 | Re: BUG #2379: Duplicate pkeys in table |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2006-04-06 16:46:10 | right sibling is not next child |