On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 11:18:20AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Evidently not, if it's not logging anything, but now the question is
> why. One possibility is that for some reason RelationGetNumberOfBlocks
> is persistently lying about the file size. (We've seen kernel bugs
> before that resulted in transiently wrong values, so this isn't totally
> beyond the realm of possibility.) Please try the attached patch, which
> extends the previous one to add a summary line including the number of
> blocks physically scanned by the seqscan.
Ok, I have results from the latest patch and have attached a redacted
server log with the select relfilenode output added inline. This is the
shorter of the logs and shows the sequence pretty clearly. I have additional
logs if wanted.
Summary: the failing process reads 0 rows from 0 blocks from the OLD
David Gould daveg(at)sonic(dot)net 510 536 1443 510 282 0869
If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Boszormenyi Zoltan||Date: 2011-08-04 09:10:01|
|Subject: Re: SYNONYMS (again)|
|Previous:||From: Dean Rasheed||Date: 2011-08-04 08:55:43|
|Subject: Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints|