Re: Index corruption - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Index corruption
Date
Msg-id 24673.1151683931@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Index corruption  (Brad Nicholson <bnichols@ca.afilias.info>)
Responses Re: Index corruption  (Brad Nicholson <bnichols@ca.afilias.info>)
List pgsql-hackers
Brad Nicholson <bnichols@ca.afilias.info> writes:
> It may or may not be the same issue, but for what it's worth, we've seen
>   the same sl_log_1 corruption on AIX 5.1 and 5.3

Hm, on what filesystem, and what PG version(s)?

I'm not completely satisfied by the its-a-kernel-bug theory, because if
it were then ISTM extending an index would be subject to the same risks
as extending a table; but I see no evidence of index page lossage in
Marc's dump.  OTOH the usage patterns are different, so maybe PG isn't
stressing the write-to-lseek path quite as hard for indexes.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Brad Nicholson
Date:
Subject: Re: Index corruption
Next
From: Brad Nicholson
Date:
Subject: Re: Index corruption