From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Wood, Dan" <hexpert(at)amazon(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |
Date: | 2017-09-28 20:07:09 |
Message-ID: | 20170928200709.badpkwtaxafc4von@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> > Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple
>
> If I run Dan Wood's test case again, the obvious symptom (spurious
> duplicates) goes away. However, the enhanced amcheck, and thus CREATE
> INDEX/REINDEX, still isn't happy about this:
>
> postgres=# select bt_index_check('t_pkey', true);
> DEBUG: 00000: verifying presence of required tuples in index "t_pkey"
> LOCATION: bt_check_every_level, verify_nbtree.c:424
> ERROR: XX000: failed to find parent tuple for heap-only tuple at
> (0,6) in table "t"
> LOCATION: IndexBuildHeapRangeScan, index.c:2597
> Time: 3.699 ms
... Rats, I obviously missed the message where you said that amcheck
detected this problem.
Odd that it's not fixed. I guess there's still some more work to do
here ...
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-09-28 20:19:52 | pgsql: Remove SGML marked sections |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-09-28 18:34:35 | Re: pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-09-28 20:20:30 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix freezing of a dead HOT-updated tuple |
Previous Message | chenhj | 2017-09-28 19:52:43 | Re: [PATCH]make pg_rewind to not copy useless WAL files |