Tom Lane wrote: > "Daniel Caune" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It seems that, in certain condition, row (199,84) is shadowing row > > (3702,85); > > This would be the expected behavior if row (199,84) were an updated > version of row (3702,85), but you couldn't see it yet in your current > transaction snapshot. A plain SELECT would show the older version > (the current one according to the snapshot) while SELECT FOR UPDATE > would show the newest committed version.
Hmm. We've been studying a case on one customer where xmin/xmax seem to be corrupted. It has had ups and downs because I have my doubts about their storage system, but I'm not completely sure that it can be really blamed. This is on 8.1.10. -- Alvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile ICBM: S 39º 49' 18.1", W 73º 13' 56.4" Major Fambrough: You wish to see the frontier? John Dunbar: Yes sir, before it's gone. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
