Philip Warner wrote:
> Item 7 -- Length: 168 Offset: 3920 (0x0f50) Flags: USED
> XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 0 CMAX|XVAC: 32902872
> Block Id: 0 linp Index: 7 Attributes: 34 Size: 36
> infomask: 0x2913
> (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED)
> t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84
> [4]: 0x00
Hmm, shouldn't we see the MOVED_OFF bit set also if the cmax/xvac field
is actually xvac?
> Item 27 -- Length: 168 Offset: 8024 (0x1f58) Flags: USED
> XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 33048159 CMAX|XVAC: 20
> Block Id: 318 linp Index: 6 Attributes: 34 Size: 36
> infomask: 0x2913
> (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED)
> t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84
> [4]: 0x00
I'm confused -- the original report showed this tuple with ctid (72,27),
but this seems to be in a different block?
What's the explanation for this tuple to have cmin=cmax? Is this
normal?
Sorry I have only questions :-(
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
