On 2014-02-18 18:10:02 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >> I've had multiple complaints of apparent data loss on 9.3.2 customer
> >> databases. There are 2 total, both complaints from the past week, one
> >> of which I was able to confirm. The customer's complaint is that
> >> certain rows are either visible or invisible, depending on whether an
> >> index scan is used or a sequential scan (I confirmed this with an
> >
> > The multixact bugs would cause tuples to be hidden at the heap level.
> > If the tuples are visible in a seqscan, then these are more likely to be
> > related to index problems, not multixact problem.
> I guess I wasn't clear enough here: The row in question was visible
> with a sequential scans but *not* with an index scan. So you have it
> backwards here (understandably).

Was there an index only scan or just a index scan? Any chance of a
corrupted index?

Do you still have the page from before you did the VACUUM?


Andres Freund

 Andres Freund                     http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to