Re: Re: [ADMIN] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [ADMIN] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D6C1B16.6030708@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [ADMIN] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [ADMIN] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set
happend during repeatable vacuum
Re: Re: [ADMIN] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag was incorrectly set happend during repeatable vacuum |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 28.02.2011 23:28, daveg wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:46:14AM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> We'll likely need to go back and forth a few times with various >> debugging patches until we get to the heart of this.. > > Anything new on this? I'm seeing at on one of my clients production boxes. I haven't heard anything from the OP since. > Also, what is the significance, ie what is the risk or damage potential if > this flag is set incorrectly? Sequential scans will honor the flag, so you might see some dead rows incorrectly returned by a sequential scan. That's the only "damage", but an incorrectly set flag could be a sign of something more sinister, like corrupt tuple headers. The flag should never be set incorrectly, so if you see that message you have hit a bug in PostgreSQL, or you have bad hardware. This flag is quite new, so a bug in PostgreSQL is quite possible. If you still have a backup that contains those incorrectly set flags, I'd like to see what the page looks like. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: