Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> People have been known to hack pg_enum on their own, especially before
> we added enum extension.
> Of course, if they do that they get to keep both pieces.
Yeah ... this would be very readily explainable if there had been a
manual deletion from pg_enum somewhere along the line. Even if there
were at that time no instances of the OID left in tables, there could
be some in upper btree pages. They'd have caused no trouble in 9.0
but would (if odd) cause trouble in 9.2.
Of course, this theory doesn't explain why the problem was seen on some
copies and not others cloned from the same database --- unless maybe
there had been an index page split on the master in between the
clonings, and that moved the troublesome OID into a position where it
was more likely to get compared-to. That's not a hugely convincing
explanation though.
regards, tom lane
