Hi,
On 2021-10-28 14:18:32 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Note that the other people that had similar complaints about Postgres 14 all
> used foreign keys on affected tables.
Do you have links to the other reports?
> * The transaction ID 365637 is very over-represented, appearing in
> several corrupt heap tuple headers, located across several heap pages.
>
> * Its "neighbor" transaction ID is 365638, which appears once more. To
> me this suggests some kind of confusion with an OldestXmin style
> cutoff during VACUUM.
I'm not quite following this bit, could you expand on that?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
