Re: ERROR: Index pg_toast_8443892_index is not a btree

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, strk <strk(at)keybit(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ERROR: Index pg_toast_8443892_index is not a btree
Date: 2003-12-09 11:35:46
Message-ID: 3FD5B392.9000400@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> Is there anything stopping us going through the code and finding all
>> ereports that can be fixed by a REINDEX, and issue a HINT with all of
>> them saying that they should REINDEX the broken index?
>
> How would you know which ones correspond to REINDEX-fixable conditions?
>
> I generally dislike hints that tell people their first action should be
> to destroy the evidence, anyway. If they had an index problem, REINDEX
> will guarantee there is no chance of learning anything about it.

I couldn't agree more. Look at this very instance. He now found the
right reindex command and the corrupted file is gone. We don't have the
slightest clue what happened to that file. Was it truncated? Did some
other process scribble around in the shared memory? How do you tell now?

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message ohp 2003-12-09 11:36:52 Re: 73.5 and uw 713
Previous Message Oli Sennhauser 2003-12-09 09:12:51 HA features for PostgreSQL in 7.5/8.0