Обсуждение: missing chunk number 497 for toast value 504723663
Dear All ,
I am using postgres 7.3.2 on RHEL 4.0.
I know the version is too old but I have no option upgrading the postgres version.
I have a table with a column type “text”. The column consists large data ranging from 500 kb to 900 kb.
Total there are 50000 records approximately. There are large number of updates occurring on this table.
Few days ago on another installation an error was generated during pg_dump “missing chunk number 0 for toast value xxx” or “missing chunk number 0 for toast value xxx”. This problem was resolved by re-indexing the toast table.
But this time there are total 422 records which are giving error of both “missing chunk number” and “unexpected chunk number” on the “text column type” and even re-indexing toast table is not resolving the issue. The only option I am left is to delete these records.
Is there any other way to resolve this issue as deleting the records will lead to loss of information and the backup I am having also consists of corrupted records.
Secondly what are probable reasons behind corruption and what can we do to prevent this error.
Thanks And Regards,
Utsav Turray
Disclaimer :- This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. If you are not the origin al intended recipient and have erroneously received this message, you are prohibited from using, copying, altering or disclosing the content of this message. Please delete it immediately and notify the sender. Newgen Software Technologies Ltd (NSTL) accepts no responsibilities for los s or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damages from virus and further acknowledges that no bin ding nature of the message shall be implied or assumed unless the sender does so expressly with due authority of NSTL.
"Utsav Turray" <utsav.turray@newgen.co.in> writes:
> I am using postgres 7.3.2 on RHEL 4.0.
Egad.
> Secondly what are probable reasons behind corruption and what can we do to
> prevent this error.
Update. Whatever reasons you might have for running 7.3.2 are bad ones.
regards, tom lane
On Thursday 16 September 2010, Tom Lane elucidated thus: > "Utsav Turray" <utsav.turray@newgen.co.in> writes: > > I am using postgres 7.3.2 on RHEL 4.0. > > Egad. > > > Secondly what are probable reasons behind corruption and what can > > we do to prevent this error. > > Update. Whatever reasons you might have for running 7.3.2 are bad > ones. Disclaimer: I agree with Tom; running 7.3.2 is a bad idea. That said: like he said, he can't. He's running RHEL 4.0. Presumably he is on a support contract, so moving to non-system software means he no longer has vendor support and upgrades for the packages installed on his system. Pg 7.3.x is what came with RHEL 4. Considering RHEL 3 will EOL (finally) at the end of October, RH is going to be supporting Pg 7.3 for quite a while. Hopefully they'll back port security fixes. j -- Joshua Kugler Part-Time System Admin/Programmer http://www.eeinternet.com - Fairbanks, AK PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ ID 0x73B13B6A
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Joshua J. Kugler <joshua@eeinternet.com> wrote: > On Thursday 16 September 2010, Tom Lane elucidated thus: >> "Utsav Turray" <utsav.turray@newgen.co.in> writes: >> > I am using postgres 7.3.2 on RHEL 4.0. >> >> Egad. >> >> > Secondly what are probable reasons behind corruption and what can >> > we do to prevent this error. >> >> Update. Whatever reasons you might have for running 7.3.2 are bad >> ones. > > Disclaimer: I agree with Tom; running 7.3.2 is a bad idea. > > That said: like he said, he can't. He's running RHEL 4.0. Presumably he > is on a support contract, so moving to non-system software means he no > longer has vendor support and upgrades for the packages installed on > his system. Pg 7.3.x is what came with RHEL 4. Considering RHEL 3 > will EOL (finally) at the end of October, RH is going to be supporting > Pg 7.3 for quite a while. Hopefully they'll back port security fixes. And 7.3.2 is the last update available for RHEL3? When I look at centos 3 repos, they have 7.3.21 in them. -- To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
"Joshua J. Kugler" <joshua@eeinternet.com> writes:
> On Thursday 16 September 2010, Tom Lane elucidated thus:
>> Update. Whatever reasons you might have for running 7.3.2 are bad
>> ones.
> Disclaimer: I agree with Tom; running 7.3.2 is a bad idea.
> That said: like he said, he can't. He's running RHEL 4.0. Presumably he
> is on a support contract, so moving to non-system software means he no
> longer has vendor support and upgrades for the packages installed on
> his system. Pg 7.3.x is what came with RHEL 4.
No, it wasn't. Red Hat shipped 7.4.x on RHEL-4, and the current package
there is 7.4.29. Red Hat did ship 7.3.x on RHEL-3, and the current
package there is 7.3.21 + several back-ported patches. 7.3.2 hasn't been
current on any Red Hat distro since 2003. I know because I do the work.
If he is depending on a third party vendor that can't be bothered to
update past 7.3.2, he needs to find a less incompetent vendor. Pronto,
before he loses more data to their incompetence.
regards, tom lane
On Friday 17 September 2010, Tom Lane elucidated thus: > "Joshua J. Kugler" <joshua@eeinternet.com> writes: > > On Thursday 16 September 2010, Tom Lane elucidated thus: > >> Update. Whatever reasons you might have for running 7.3.2 are bad > >> ones. > > > > Disclaimer: I agree with Tom; running 7.3.2 is a bad idea. > > > > That said: like he said, he can't. He's running RHEL 4.0. > > Presumably he is on a support contract, so moving to non-system > > software means he no longer has vendor support and upgrades for the > > packages installed on his system. Pg 7.3.x is what came with RHEL > > 4. > > No, it wasn't. Red Hat shipped 7.4.x on RHEL-4, and the current > package there is 7.4.29. Red Hat did ship 7.3.x on RHEL-3, and the > current package there is 7.3.21 + several back-ported patches. 7.3.2 > hasn't been current on any Red Hat distro since 2003. I know because > I do the work. > > If he is depending on a third party vendor that can't be bothered to > update past 7.3.2, he needs to find a less incompetent vendor. > Pronto, before he loses more data to their incompetence. I apologize. I went to look at packages, and must have seen the '7' and it didn't click that it was 7.4. I must have scanned too fast. So yes, that is *VERY* weird that he is running RHEL 4, but only Pg 7.3. j -- Joshua Kugler Part-Time System Admin/Programmer http://www.eeinternet.com - Fairbanks, AK PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ ID 0x73B13B6A