Обсуждение: cache lookup failed for attribute 1 of relation XXXXXX

Alessandro Aste <alessandro.aste@gmail.com> writes:
> pg_dump: [archiver (db)] query failed: ERROR:  cache lookup failed for
> attribute 1 of relation 2223152859

>     pg_dump: [archiver (db)] query was: SELECT t.tableoid, t.oid, t.relname
> AS indexname, pg_catalog.pg_get_indexdef(i.indexrelid) AS indexdef,
> t.relnatts AS indnkeys, i.indkey, i.indisclustered, i.indisreplident,
> t.relpages, c.contype, c.conname, c.condeferrable, c.condeferred,
> c.tableoid AS contableoid, c.oid AS conoid,
> pg_catalog.pg_get_constraintdef(c.oid, false) AS condef, (SELECT spcname
> FROM pg_catalog.pg_tablespace s WHERE s.oid = t.reltablespace) AS
> tablespace, t.reloptions AS indreloptions FROM pg_catalog.pg_index i JOIN
> pg_catalog.pg_class t ON (t.oid = i.indexrelid) LEFT JOIN
> pg_catalog.pg_constraint c ON (i.indrelid = c.conrelid AND i.indexrelid =
> c.conindid AND c.contype IN ('p','u','x')) WHERE i.indrelid =
> '2223152859'::pg_catalog.oid AND i.indisvalid AND i.indisready ORDER BY
> indexname

Hmm ...

> Index with that indexrelid does not exists
> SELECT * FROM pg_catalog.pg_index WHERE indexrelid = '2223152859';
> (0 rows)

You sure?  The failed query was looking for indrelid not indexrelid.
That implies that 2223152859 is/was the table not the index.  In
any case it'd be better to look for that OID in pg_class.

If that table is in fact gone, one possible theory is that it was
dropped concurrently with the pg_dump run.  Then possibly
pg_get_indexdef() would see the table as already gone when the
surrounding query had found it in the catalogs, which could easily
result in the reported error.  However, pg_dump shouldn't be poking
into the indexes of a table that it doesn't have AccessShareLock on,
so I'm not quite sure how we could end up with this result.  Maybe
the true explanation is more complicated, like an ALTER DROP COLUMN
that committed just as pg_dump was starting.  Have you got records
of any DDL being done at that time?

            regards, tom lane

[ please keep the list cc'd for the archives' sake ]

Alessandro Aste <alessandro.aste@gmail.com> writes:
> Hello Tom, thanks for your reply:
>  SELECT * FROM pg_class  WHERE OID = 2223152859 ;
> (0 rows)
> I'm not aware of any DDL at that time.

Hm.  Well, that OID was definitely there when pg_dump looked, and
it's not there now, so something changed --- though we can't prove
it changed concurrently.

In any case, I'd bet that if we ran this to ground it would prove to be a
concurrent-DDL issue.  pg_dump tries to protect itself against concurrent
DDL, but for assorted architectural reasons the protection is not 100%;
sometimes you can get odd failures like this, essentially due to "clock
skew" between pg_dump's view of the catalogs and the server's view of the
catalogs.  As long as it works on retry, I wouldn't worry too much about
it.

            regards, tom lane