Re: BUG #2379: Duplicate pkeys in table
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #2379: Duplicate pkeys in table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20060406165629.GF15753@surnet.cl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #2379: Duplicate pkeys in table (Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #2379: Duplicate pkeys in table
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Philip Warner wrote: > Item 7 -- Length: 168 Offset: 3920 (0x0f50) Flags: USED > XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 0 CMAX|XVAC: 32902872 > Block Id: 0 linp Index: 7 Attributes: 34 Size: 36 > infomask: 0x2913 > (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED) > t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84 > [4]: 0x00 Hmm, shouldn't we see the MOVED_OFF bit set also if the cmax/xvac field is actually xvac? > Item 27 -- Length: 168 Offset: 8024 (0x1f58) Flags: USED > XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 33048159 CMAX|XVAC: 20 > Block Id: 318 linp Index: 6 Attributes: 34 Size: 36 > infomask: 0x2913 > (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED) > t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84 > [4]: 0x00 I'm confused -- the original report showed this tuple with ctid (72,27), but this seems to be in a different block? What's the explanation for this tuple to have cmin=cmax? Is this normal? Sorry I have only questions :-( -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: