Re: postgreSQL : duplicate DB names - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Khangelani Gama
Subject Re: postgreSQL : duplicate DB names
Date
Msg-id bdb4adeb12e0bce5a7b24ad9e89e5e0f@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postgreSQL : duplicate DB names  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 5:35 PM
To: Alban Hertroys
Cc: Khangelani Gama; Thomas Kellerer; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] postgreSQL : duplicate DB names

Alban Hertroys <haramrae@gmail.com> writes:
> On 26 May 2014, at 10:28, Khangelani Gama <kgama@argility.com> wrote:
>> It's psql 8.0.4, OS is Red Hat Linux release 9 (Shrike

> 8.0.4? That went EOL almost 4 years ago and even then you should be
running a version around 8.0.26. You're 22 bugfix releases behind, which
likely includes fixes for several data-corruption issues.
> See: http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/

8.0.x did not have any real defenses against transaction ID wraparound
(the behavior of forcing a shutdown when wraparound gets too close was
added in 8.1, and there was no built-in autovacuum back then either).
So my money is on this being a wraparound problem, ie, some dead but
never-vacuumed pg_database row has returned to visibility because its
deleting transaction is now "in the future".

If you're very lucky, vacuuming pg_database will fix it.  But take a
backup *first*, in case you're not lucky and vacuuming makes things worse.
I'd shut down the postmaster and then make a physical copy (tarball) of
the whole data directory tree, just to be sure you can get back to where
you are.

As a former Red Hatter, I cannot resist making the point that your OS
version is even hoarier than your PG version, and is certainly full of
since-fixed bugs.  You are *years* overdue for some serious attention to
software updates.

            regards, tom lane



Thanks a lot Tom, And Thanks to everyone who responded. It looks like the
best option we have is to restore from the latest backup. And then plan to
do the upgrade in the near future.


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The contents of and attachments to this e-mail are intended for the addressee only, and may contain the confidential
information of Argility (Proprietary) Limited and/or its subsidiaries. Any review, use or dissemination thereof by
anyone
other than the intended addressee is prohibited.If you are not the intended addressee please notify the writer
immediately
and destroy the e-mail. Argility (Proprietary) Limited and its subsidiaries distance themselves from and accept no
liability
for unauthorised use of their e-mail facilities or e-mails sent other than strictly for business purposes.



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Jack Douglas"
Date:
Subject: Re: new index type with clustering in mind.
Next
From: Dmitry Samonenko
Date:
Subject: libpq: indefinite block on poll during network problems