Re: 3rd time is a charm.....right sibling is not next child crash.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Amiel <becauseimjeff(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 3rd time is a charm.....right sibling is not next child crash.
Date: 2010-06-08 16:23:56
Message-ID: 6257.1276014236@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Jeff Amiel <becauseimjeff(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> New one yesterday.

> Jun 7 15:05:01 db-1 postgres[9334]: [ID 748848 local0.crit] [3989781-1] 2010-06-07 15:05:01.087 CDT 9334PANIC: right sibling 169 of block 168 is not next child of 249 in index "sl_seqlog_idx"

In your original report you mentioned that the next autovacuum attempt
on the same table succeeded without incident. Has that been true each
time? I wonder whether this is some transient state, rather than actual
corruption that you need to REINDEX to recover from.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aaron Burnett 2010-06-08 16:29:25 Some insight on the proper SQL would be appreciated
Previous Message p.buongiovanni 2010-06-08 16:17:06 Re: BUG #5492: Sequence corruption

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2010-06-08 17:32:59 How about closing some Open Items?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-06-08 16:14:37 Re: PlPython bug in 9.0/8.4.4