On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 13:53, David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 12:36, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > So yeah, if we could have log_autovacuum_min_duration = 0 perhaps > > that would yield a clue. > > FWIW, I agree with your earlier statement about it looking very much > like auto-vacuum has run on that table, but equally, if something like > the pg_index record was damaged we could get the same plan change. > > We could also do something like the attached just in case we're > barking up the wrong tree.
I've not seen any recent failures from Parula that relate to this issue. The last one seems to have been about 4 weeks ago. I'm now wondering if it's time to revert the debugging code added in 1db689715. Does anyone think differently? David
