Re: nbtree: assertion failure in _bt_killitems() for posting tuple

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: nbtree: assertion failure in _bt_killitems() for posting tuple
Date: 2020-03-20 00:00:19
Message-ID: CAH2-WzkwOSvrvBgQs0n-AZ69j86ANxr3VB=cHa3yhVxDx92eYg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:34 AM Anastasia Lubennikova
<a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> Unfortunately I cannot attach test and core dump, since they rely on the
> enterprise multimaster extension code.
> Here are some details from the core dump, that I find essential:
>
> Stack is
> _bt_killitems
> _bt_release_current_position
> _bt_release_scan_state
> btrescan
> index_rescan
> RelationFindReplTupleByIndex
>
> (gdb) p offnum
> $3 = 125
> (gdb) p *item
> $4 = {ip_blkid = {bi_hi = 0, bi_lo = 2}, ip_posid = 200}
> (gdb) p *kitem
> $5 = {heapTid = {ip_blkid = {bi_hi = 0, bi_lo = 2}, ip_posid = 200},
> indexOffset = 121, tupleOffset = 32639}
>
>
> Unless I miss something, this assertion must be removed.

Is this index an unlogged index, under the hood?

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message James Coleman 2020-03-20 00:04:43 Re: improve transparency of bitmap-only heap scans
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-03-19 23:32:55 Re: Missing errcode() in ereport