Philip Warner wrote: > Item 7 -- Length: 168 Offset: 3920 (0x0f50) Flags: USED > XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 0 CMAX|XVAC: 32902872 > Block Id: 0 linp Index: 7 Attributes: 34 Size: 36 > infomask: 0x2913 > (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED) > t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84 > [4]: 0x00
Hmm, shouldn't we see the MOVED_OFF bit set also if the cmax/xvac field is actually xvac? > Item 27 -- Length: 168 Offset: 8024 (0x1f58) Flags: USED > XMIN: 32902771 CMIN: 20 XMAX: 33048159 CMAX|XVAC: 20 > Block Id: 318 linp Index: 6 Attributes: 34 Size: 36 > infomask: 0x2913 > (HASNULL|HASVARWIDTH|HASOID|XMIN_COMMITTED|XMAX_INVALID|UPDATED) > t_bits: [0]: 0x9f [1]: 0x80 [2]: 0x7e [3]: 0x84 > [4]: 0x00 I'm confused -- the original report showed this tuple with ctid (72,27), but this seems to be in a different block? What's the explanation for this tuple to have cmin=cmax? Is this normal? Sorry I have only questions :-( -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
