Re: Database crash in Postgres 8.4.3
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Database crash in Postgres 8.4.3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28357.1345590928@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Database crash in Postgres 8.4.3 ("Freddie Burgess" <fburgess@radiantblue.com>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
"Freddie Burgess" <fburgess@radiantblue.com> writes: > Late yesterday afternoon our DB server went down hard. we tried to re-start > and it went into recovery mode to recover transaction history and failed. Oh dear. I'll spare you the lecture about running up-to-date minor releases, because this doesn't seem to exactly match any known-and-fixed bug in 8.4.x, but you will reconsider that policy no? > Notable error was: > FATAL: failed to re-find parent key in index "257969064" for split pages > 8366/12375 > If you look this error up, it indicates issues with the transaction logs and > the inability to recover due to corrupt or missing transaction logs. Don't know where you read that, but this has nothing to do with transaction logs. It appears to indicate pre-existing corruption in a btree index, specifically that there is no downlink in the next index level up pointing to an index page that just got split according to the WAL event stream. Unfortunately the WAL replay environment is too limited to give you a very good fix on *which* index, unless you have some other way of knowing what relfilenode 257969064 corresponds to. What exactly happened when your DB server "went down hard"? It seems somewhat likely that that involved filesystem corruption that WAL replay was unable to fix. Since the replay got as far as here, the next index level up doesn't contain obvious corruption, it just lacks an entry that should be there. The most likely inference is that there's a stale page where the downlink entry should have been, which suggests strongly that fsync failed to write a page when it was supposed to (leading to Postgres supposing that the index page was safely down on disk and could be forgotten about, when it was not). That's all a rather roundabout way of saying that you'd be well advised to take a hard look at your filesystem configuration. These symptoms are very consistent with the theory that the filesystem is not honoring fsync requests properly. > If the data is in an inconsistent state, are there other alternative > solutions, such as finding the index specified in the FATAL error and > somehow dropping it? You could try modifying the source code to reduce that error to a WARNING temporarily, but I'm not sure how far it will get you. The concern here is that if one page wasn't written when it was supposed to be, there are probably others too. And most likely not all of them are index pages. Anyway, if it appears that you're not far away from the end of the xlog, yeah I'd try disabling error tests until it gets to the end of xlog. Once the DB is up you can determine which indexes were mentioned in the messages (look at pg_class.relfilenode) and drop or reindex them. A preferable solution, if you still had the WAL logs from the previous checkpoint cycle, would be to back up the WAL pointer to the preceding checkpoint and replay forward from there. (This is essentially betting that all the corruption stems from writes that failed to get to disk just before the last checkpoint.) However, unless you've been running a PITR archiving setup, you probably haven't got that option. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: