From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Mason Hale" <masonhale(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Duplicate values found when reindexing unique index |
Date: | 2007-12-31 06:27:51 |
Message-ID: | 23898.1199082471@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> I wonder whether it's just a coincidence that these have the same offset
>> number...
> I can't imagine any Postgres bug which would depend on the offsets
> being the same. But what I could imagine is filesystem corruption
> which copied the block to someplace else in the table or possibly has
> even mapped the same block into two different places in the table.
That idea was in my mind too, but Mason stated that the rows showed
different "updated_at" values, so they couldn't be mirror images of that
sort. The pg_filedump output for the two blocks would be more conclusive
about this though --- I was expecting to pay attention to the whole
block contents not only the seemingly-dup rows.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-31 14:31:16 | Re: Duplicate values found when reindexing unique index |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-12-31 06:12:19 | Re: Duplicate values found when reindexing unique index |