On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 13:53, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 12:36, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > So yeah, if we could have log_autovacuum_min_duration = 0 perhaps
> > that would yield a clue.
>
> FWIW, I agree with your earlier statement about it looking very much
> like auto-vacuum has run on that table, but equally, if something like
> the pg_index record was damaged we could get the same plan change.
>
> We could also do something like the attached just in case we're
> barking up the wrong tree.
I've not seen any recent failures from Parula that relate to this
issue. The last one seems to have been about 4 weeks ago.
I'm now wondering if it's time to revert the debugging code added in
1db689715. Does anyone think differently?
David