On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: >> In the end, commit 6bfa88a fixed that old recovery bug by making sure >> the recovery routine heap_xlog_lock() did the right thing. In both >> cases (Feb 2014 and today), the index wasn't really corrupt -- it just >> pointed to the root of a HOT chain when it should point to some child >> tuple (or maybe a successor HOT chain). > > Unless I'm very confused, it's really not OK to point at a child tuple > rather than the root of the HOT chain.
Please see my later clarification. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers