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 > >> EXPLAIN ANALYZE). > > > > 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? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers