Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently
| От | Andres Freund |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20211108175113.tojy5hvxws7gjrhp@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #17268: Possible corruption in toast index after reindex index concurrently (Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, On 2021-11-04 20:07:28 +0200, Maxim Boguk wrote: > ERROR: heap tuple (59561917,1) from table "pg_toast_2624976286" lacks > matching index tuple within index "pg_toast_2624976286_index" > HINT: Retrying verification using the function > bt_index_parent_check() might provide a more specific error. Could you use https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/pageinspect.html to get the heap items for this page? Best after verifying that that ctid still shows an amcheck error. Something like SELECT * FROM page_header(get_raw_page('pg_toast_2624976286', 59561917)); SELECT lp, lp_off, lp_flags, lp_len, t_xmin, t_xmax, t_field3, t_ctid, t_infomask2, t_infomask, mask.raw_flags, mask.combined_flags,t_hoff, t_bits FROM heap_page_items(get_raw_page('pg_toast_2624976286', 59561917)), heap_tuple_infomask_flags(t_infomask, t_infomask2) AS mask; Do you have WAL archiving or such set up? If you still have the WAL from that time it'd be helpful. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: