Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint write errors ( getting worse )

also, any thoughts on what could be causing these issues? On 10/22/2016 05:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: CS DBA writes: So I ran REINDEX on all the db's and the errors went away for a bit. Now I'm seeing this: Log entries like this:FATAL: could not read block 0 of

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint write errors ( getting worse )

would a dump/restore correct these issues? On 10/22/2016 05:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: CS DBA writes: So I ran REINDEX on all the db's and the errors went away for a bit. Now I'm seeing this: Log entries like this:FATAL: could not read block 0 of relation

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint write errors ( getting worse )

CS DBA writes: > So I ran REINDEX on all the db's and the errors went away for a bit. Now > I'm seeing this: > Log entries like this:FATAL: could not read block 0 of relation > base/1311892067/2687: read only 0 of 8192 bytes You have a problem there, because:

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint write errors ( getting worse )

So I ran REINDEX on all the db's and the errors went away for a bit. Now I'm seeing this: Log entries like this:FATAL: could not read block 0 of relation base/1311892067/2687: read only 0 of 8192 bytes So I checked which db it is: $ psql -h localhost psql (8.4.20) Type "help" for help.

Re: [GENERAL] checkpoint write errors

Thanks the REINDEX fixed it, it's a client of ours and we're pushing to get them to move to 9.5 On 10/21/2016 06:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote: CS DBA writes: we're seeing the below errors over and over in the logs of one of our postgres databases. Version 8.4.22 [ you

Re: [GENERAL] Selecting records with highest timestamp - for a join

Should I use LATERAL JOIN? On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Alexander Farber < alexander.far...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In PostgreSQL 9.5.3 I keep player infos from various social networks: > > # TABLE words_social; > sid | social | female | given | family | photo | place | stamp| > uid

Re: [GENERAL] Large empty table, balanced INSERTs and DELETEs, not being vacuumed

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 6:02 AM, Vick Khera wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Jason Dusek wrote: >> This is really only a temporary fix, though. We can have a cron job running >> in the background running TRUNCATE ONLY ... but this seems like the

Re: [GENERAL] Replication rolling back to normal.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Dasitha Karunajeewa wrote: > What I want to know is how to switch them back to the normal status. That > means pgmaster need to be the Master server which acept the writed and > pgslave that accepts only reads along with the replication.