Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-10 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 17:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Is there any particular reason to suppose that the empty pages appeared > during a crash recovery? > > Have you read through md.c? I seem to recall there are some slightly > squirrelly choices made there about segment-extension behavior. May

Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-09 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 17:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: > > A corrupt record of a block number would do this in XLogReadBuffer() if > > we had full page writes enabled. But it would have to be corrupt between > > setting it correctly and the CRC check on the WAL record. Which is

Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > A corrupt record of a block number would do this in XLogReadBuffer() if > we had full page writes enabled. But it would have to be corrupt between > setting it correctly and the CRC check on the WAL record. Which is a > fairly small window of believability. > Should there be

Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-09 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 16:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: > > A couple of people in recent years have had a problem with "page X is > > uninitialised -- fixing" messages. > > > I have a case now with 569357 consecutive pages that required fixing in > > pg_attribute. We looked at p

Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > A couple of people in recent years have had a problem with "page X is > uninitialised -- fixing" messages. > I have a case now with 569357 consecutive pages that required fixing in > pg_attribute. We looked at pages by hand and they really are > uninitialised, but otherwise

Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-09 Thread Simon Riggs
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 13:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: > > A couple of people in recent years have had a problem with "page X is > > uninitialised -- fixing" messages. > > > I have a case now with 569357 consecutive pages that required fixing in > > pg_attribute. We looked at p

Re: [HACKERS] page is uninitialized --- fixing

2009-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > A couple of people in recent years have had a problem with "page X is > uninitialised -- fixing" messages. > I have a case now with 569357 consecutive pages that required fixing in > pg_attribute. We looked at pages by hand and they really are > uninitialised, but otherwise