From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Is anyone aware of data loss causing MultiXact bugs in 9.3.2? |
Date: | 2014-02-19 08:40:14 |
Message-ID: | 20140219084014.GD28858@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-02-18 18:10:02 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >> I've had multiple complaints of apparent data loss on 9.3.2 customer
> >> databases. There are 2 total, both complaints from the past week, one
> >> of which I was able to confirm. The customer's complaint is that
> >> certain rows are either visible or invisible, depending on whether an
> >> index scan is used or a sequential scan (I confirmed this with an
> >> EXPLAIN ANALYZE).
> >
> > The multixact bugs would cause tuples to be hidden at the heap level.
> > If the tuples are visible in a seqscan, then these are more likely to be
> > related to index problems, not multixact problem.
>
> I guess I wasn't clear enough here: The row in question was visible
> with a sequential scans but *not* with an index scan. So you have it
> backwards here (understandably).
Was there an index only scan or just a index scan? Any chance of a
corrupted index?
Do you still have the page from before you did the VACUUM?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-02-19 08:55:03 | Re: Is anyone aware of data loss causing MultiXact bugs in 9.3.2? |
Previous Message | Shigeru Hanada | 2014-02-19 07:17:05 | Re: inherit support for foreign tables |