Re: BUG #10329: Could not read block 0 in file "base/56100265/57047884": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
| От | Bruce Momjian |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #10329: Could not read block 0 in file "base/56100265/57047884": read only 0 of 8192 bytes |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20140515190235.GH25053@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #10329: Could not read block 0 in file "base/56100265/57047884": read only 0 of 8192 bytes (Olivier Macchioni <olivier.macchioni@wingo.ch>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #10329: Could not read block 0 in file "base/56100265/57047884": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 05:20:35PM +0200, Olivier Macchioni wrote: > > [...] > > "hash_idx"? Is this a hash index? Those aren't supported for replication > > purposes (no WAL code :-(). > > > > regards, tom lane > > Bingo: > > xx=# \d ir_translation_src_hash_idx > Index "public.ir_translation_src_hash_idx" > Column | Type | Definition > --------+---------+------------ > src | integer | src > hash, for table "public.ir_translation" > > > (for the record, this is created by the stock version of OpenERP v6) > > And it's the only hash index out of 1741 other indexes on my system... > > I guess my best bet is to replace it by another kind of indexes... and maybe one day PostgreSQL will be clever enough toissue a warning / error in such a case for the people like me who don't read *all the doc* :P > > Thanks a lot and sorry for the noise :) Yes, streaming replication has made our hash indexes even worse. In the past, I have suggested we issue a warning for the creation of hash indexes, but did not get enough agreement. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: