Benjamin Smith writes:
> On Friday, April 15, 2011 09:50:57 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>> If you simply unpacked the tar archive and started a postmaster on that,
>> you'd be pretty much guaranteed to get a corrupt database. The tar
>> archive is not a valid snapshot by itself --- you have to replay
>> w
On Friday, April 15, 2011 09:50:57 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> If you simply unpacked the tar archive and started a postmaster on that,
> you'd be pretty much guaranteed to get a corrupt database. The tar
> archive is not a valid snapshot by itself --- you have to replay
> whatever WAL was generated duri
Dan Biagini writes:
> I have a 9.0.1 database with two corrupted tables (one table has 20
> rows, the other 140). The tables *seem* fine for read/select
> operations, but updating certain rows in the table produce error
> messages:
> update media set updated_at = now() at time zone 'UTC';
> ERRO
On April 14, 2011 08:10:47 am Dan Biagini wrote:
> I suspect that it may have occurred during a filesystem level backup
> (ie pg_start_backup(), tar -czf..., pg_stop_backup()), as I performed
> a backup and moved the database to a different system. After
> restoring the files and starting postgre
I have a 9.0.1 database with two corrupted tables (one table has 20
rows, the other 140). The tables *seem* fine for read/select
operations, but updating certain rows in the table produce error
messages:
update media set updated_at = now() at time zone 'UTC';
ERROR: could not read block 2 in fil
