| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Maxim Boguk <maxim(dot)boguk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Jeremy Finzel <finzelj(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid |
| Date: | 2018-05-24 20:49:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20180524204940.slqg47jmhwrwewyg@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-May-24, Andres Freund wrote:
> FWIW, even if that weren't the case: a) there'd be a lot more wrong with
> this routine imo. b) some of the tuples affected clearly weren't
> frozen...
Right.
BTW is it just a coincidence or are all the affected tables pg_authid?
Maybe the problem is shared relations ..? Maybe the fact that they have
separate relfrozenxid (!?) in different databases?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-05-24 20:58:20 | Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-05-24 20:46:24 | Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-05-24 20:58:20 | Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-05-24 20:46:24 | Re: found xmin from before relfrozenxid on pg_catalog.pg_authid |