On Oct24, 2011, at 01:27 , Simon Riggs wrote: > FATAL: could not access status of transaction 21110784 > which, in pg_subtrans, is the first xid on a new subtrans page. So we > have missed zeroing a page. > > pg_control shows ... Latest checkpoint's oldestActiveXID: 21116666 > which shows quite clearly that the pg_control file is later than it should be.
But shouldn't pg_control be largely irrelevant in a hot backup scenario? Most (all?) of the information contained therein should be overwritten with the contents of the checkpoint referenced by the backup label, shouldn't it? best regards, Florian Pflug -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
