| From: | Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Wim Rouquart <wim(dot)rouquart(at)kbc(dot)be>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Index (primary key) corrupt? |
| Date: | 2026-03-10 14:15:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAKAnmmJogm0T4vF5nvhzK=GbfAcPhsLtKR_yRn-neMQP7S2_YQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 3:53 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
wrote:
> Yeah, but the indrelid did not change after the the REINDEX.
>
Agreed, but none of this makes sense. pg_dump grabs pks via a bulk pg_index
scan based on table oids, so I wanted to rule out some problem there.
I'm chalking this one up to user error, not database corruption, as the OP
has not actually shown us the output of how they are determining the
missing index, and then how the reindex fixes it (although I appreciate the
pg_index query results). To put another way, user error is a much more
likely explanation than anything else given the lack of specific data.
Cheers,
Greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Wim Rouquart | 2026-03-10 14:24:43 | RE: Index (primary key) corrupt? |
| Previous Message | Juan Rodrigo Alejandro Burgos Mella | 2026-03-10 08:45:27 | Re: LISTAGG à la Oracle in PostgreSQL |