[HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match

2005-01-12 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
Postgres on one of my big database servers just crashed with the following message PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match Does any one have any idea's what might cause this. Some background. This is a Debian Sarge system running PG 7.4.5 on i386 dual XEON system with 4G of

Re: [HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match

2005-01-12 Thread Tom Lane
Jim Buttafuoco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Postgres on one of my big database servers just crashed with the following message PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match Does any one have any idea's what might cause this. Corrupted btree index. REINDEX should help, though I'm afraid

Re: [HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match

2005-01-12 Thread Jim Buttafuoco
:11 -0500 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match Jim Buttafuoco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Postgres on one of my big database servers just crashed with the following message PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match Does any one have any idea's what

[HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match

2004-08-27 Thread Marc G. Fournier
The above error refers to a btree index, correct? Do/will a REINDEX fix that, or do I have to physically DROP/CREATE the INDEX? This is a 7.4 database, if that matters ... Thanks ... Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match

2004-08-27 Thread Tom Lane
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The above error refers to a btree index, correct? Do/will a REINDEX fix that, or do I have to physically DROP/CREATE the INDEX? REINDEX should fix it --- but how did it get that way? regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] PANIC: right sibling's left-link doesn't match

2004-08-27 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote: Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The above error refers to a btree index, correct? Do/will a REINDEX fix that, or do I have to physically DROP/CREATE the INDEX? REINDEX should fix it --- but how did it get that way? For lack of a better way of saying