Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Maxim Boguk
Тема Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again
Дата
Msg-id CAK-MWwTYrvWxfZvw6UNe7-PY5S=apCKT=TQEWB_vhL1LtDUzZg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again  (Rob Sargentg <robjsargent@gmail.com>)
Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again  (Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-general


On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com> writes:
>> Do you know why the mod date on the file is 2012-02-20 12:04?

> Cron was attempt to populate the table once per hour after that problem
> happened.
> And each time it was produced the same error.

That's interesting ... is there any possibility that the insertions were
attempting to insert values that matched a previously-existing primary
key value?  I'm thinking there's no reason for the INSERT per se to be
touching nonexistent blocks, but if for some reason the pkey index still
had entries pointing at vanished rows (as it seems to) then the errors
could be coming from uniqueness checks attempting to fetch those rows to
see if they're live.

                       regards, tom lane

Hi,

There isn't possibility but close to 100% new inserted values were matched a previously-existing primary
key value.
The table is hand-made 'materialyzed view'-type statistic table which is getting recalculated via cron.

--
Maxim Boguk
Senior Postgresql DBA.



В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again
Следующее
От: Rob Sargentg
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Unfamous 'could not read block ... in file "...": read only 0 of 8192 bytes' again