Re: BUG #6200: standby bad memory allocations on SELECT - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: BUG #6200: standby bad memory allocations on SELECT
Date
Msg-id 25481.1327986356@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #6200: standby bad memory allocations on SELECT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #6200: standby bad memory allocations on SELECT  (Bridget Frey <bridget.frey@redfin.com>)
Re: BUG #6200: standby bad memory allocations on SELECT  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
I wrote:
> Hm.  The stack trace is definitive that it's finding the bad data in a
> tuple that it's trying to print to the client, not in an index.

BTW, after a bit more reflection it occurs to me that it's not so much
that the data is necessarily *bad*, as that it seemingly doesn't match
the tuple descriptor that the backend's trying to interpret it with.
(In particular, the reported symptom would be consistent with finding
a small integer constant at a place where the descriptor expects to find
a variable-length field.)  So that opens up a different line of thought
about how those could get out of sync on a standby.  Are you in the
habit of issuing ALTER TABLE commands to add/delete/change columns on
these tables?  In fact, is there any DDL whatsoever going on around the
time these failures happen?

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #6200: standby bad memory allocations on SELECT
Next
From: Dharmendra Goyal
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #6404: postgres account not created during unattended install