"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Reformatting and sorting, we have
>>
>> WARNING: page 28900 of relation 1663/16384/76718 was uninitialized
>> WARNING: page 28902 of relation 1663/16384/76718 was uninitialized
>> WARNING: page 26706 of relation 1663/16384/76719 was uninitialized
>> WARNING: page 26708 of relation 1663/16384/76719 was uninitialized
> Those two are interesting because we appear to have two valid pages in
> the middle of some uninitialized ones. That implies were not looking at
> an unapplied truncation.
Not necessarily --- it's possible the WAL sequence simply didn't touch
those pages.
Your suggestion to rerun the recovery with higher log_min_messages
is a good one, because that way we'd get some detail about what the
WAL records that touched the pages were. I think DEBUG1 would be
sufficient for that, though, and DEBUG2 might be pretty durn verbose.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
