On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:53 PM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
Greetings,
* Abdul Qoyyuum (aqoyyuum@cardaccess.com.bn) wrote: > Knowing that it's a data corruption issue, the only way to fix this is to > vacuum and reindex the database. What was suggested was the following: > > SET zero_damaged_pages = 0; # This is so that we can have the application > to continue to run > VACUUM FULL VERBOSE ANALYSE; # Do a full vacuum and analyse the problem if > possible. > REINDEX DATABASE "core"; # Then do a reindex and clean it up.
This is only going to help if the issue is in an index, which isn't clear from what's been shared.
That is a good point. Problem is I can't really find out as the logs isn't that verbose to tell me more. Part of the logs shows something like this:
2023-11-29 04:27:17.486 [ERROR] [dispatcher-1095] [<redacted>] - ERROR: invalid page in block 35217 of relation base/16421/3192429 Where: parallel worker org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: invalid page in block 35217 of relation base/16421/3192429 Where: parallel worker at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2565) ~[postgresql-42.2.24.jre7.jar:42.2.24.jre7] at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processResults(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2297) ~[postgresql-42.2.24.jre7.jar:42.2.24.jre7]
> We're on Postgresql 12. This has worked before it happened (almost exactly > a year ago) and I think this needs a more permanent solution. I've looked > at routine vacuuming and checked the autovacuum is set to on and the > following configurations:
This isn't something that should ever happen ...
This also doesn't have anything to do with autovacuum, changing settings there won't make any difference.
Noted but it has been a clean running since a year ago that I ran the vacuum and reindex commands.
> Can anyone advise if there's anything else we can do? We have no clue what > causes the invalid page block and we are running a High Availability > cluster set up but we are hoping that there may be a way to mitigate it.
Was there some kind of hardware fault? Did you do a failover? Restore from a backup? Do you have checksums enabled? How many times has this happened before, and how many pages were impacted? What is the design of your HA solution, are you using PG replication or something else?
There have been a few maintenance operations earlier this year but nothing too critical or anything failed that would have caused the database to go corrupt. The HA solution we're using is the pacemaker with the active passive setup.
Unsure if sharing the relevant WAL settings from postgresql.conf may be useful but here they are:
max_connections = 300 shared_buffers = 128MB
archive_mode = on archive_command = 'test ! -f /opt/databases/postgres12/wal_archive/%f && cp %p /opt/databases/postgres12/wal_archive/%f' hot_standby = on wal_level = hot_standby full_page_writes = on max_wal_senders = 10 wal_keep_segments = 100 # 16MB per segment = 1.6GB hot_standby = on restart_after_crash = off wal_receiver_status_interval = 2 # seconds max_standby_streaming_delay = -1 max_standby_archive_delay = -1 synchronous_commit = on hot_standby_feedback = on wal_sender_timeout = 10000 wal_receiver_timeout = 10000
