Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83751337B51 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:05:38 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09910-05-3 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:05:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from smadev.internal.net (host3.dynacom.ondsl.gr [62.103.35.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71DF01337BE4 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:05:27 -0400 (AST) Received: from smadev.internal.net (localhost.internal.net [127.0.0.1]) by smadev.internal.net (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id oAFD5Q8x072725 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:05:26 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by smadev.internal.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id oAFD5QFG072724 for pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:05:26 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com) From: Achilleas Mantzios Organization: Dynacom Tankers Mgmt To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Postgres error: could not open relation base/xxxxx/yyyyy Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 16:05:26 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <201011151303.39898.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201011151505.26409.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.671 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT=1.449, URI_HEX=1.122 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201011/123 X-Sequence-Number: 36089 Whoever did the memory installation, should also have taken care of checkin= g it's working ok. A good idea is to use ECC memory. Does fsck on the remote system run with reporting problems as well?? (it mi= ght report problems such as incorrect block counts, missing inodes etc...) Also check for disk, controller problems. =CE=A3=CF=84=CE=B9=CF=82 Monday 15 November 2010 14:42:32 =CE=BF/=CE=B7 Pab= lo Delgado D=C3=ADaz-Pache =CE=AD=CE=B3=CF=81=CE=B1=CF=88=CE=B5: > Hi Achilleas, >=20 > Thanks for your quick response. > We do have backups and a couple of spare servers running in parallel so > we're safe in that sense. Thanks for your advice anyway. >=20 > To run *memtest86 *we have to go to the datacenter and that will take us a > few days. Is there anything we can do remotely? >=20 > Could it be anything different than memory HW problem? > Btw, we are not using that server at the moment :) >=20 > Thanks >=20 > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Achilleas Mantzios < > achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> wrote: >=20 > > Stop using the system immediately, since many things inserted to the DB > > might simply be garbage. > > Inspect your memory with memtest86. > > > > I would even suggest moving to a new HW if available, and start working > > into two parallel directions: > > > > a) try to bring your DB into a sane state > > b) try to fix your HW server, which apparently has problems. > > > > Files are not "disappearing" like that, in normal situations. > > You cannot trust your current HW to run postgresql. Its a guarantee met= hod > > to lose your data, if you > > go on by this start/stop/restore/pray circle. > > > > IMPORTANT: Handle your old (pre-memory upgrade) backups like expensive > > chinese vases. > > Start from those good and trustworthy backups to do any database "repla= y" > > (or similar) work which > > would lead to a viable situation. > > > > =CE=A3=CF=84=CE=B9=CF=82 Monday 15 November 2010 11:55:38 =CE=BF/=CE=B7= Pablo Delgado D=C3=ADaz-Pache =CE=AD=CE=B3=CF=81=CE=B1=CF=88=CE=B5: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > We've been using postgres for 9 years without a problem until now! Two > > > problems in a very short time! > > > The first one is described in > > > > > http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Autovacuum-seems-to-block-datab= ase-WARNING-worker-took-too-long-to-start-td3264261.html > > > This is another one (not related I think) ... > > > > > > Postgres server is usually working fine. All of a sudden we start get= ting > > > these errors ... > > > > > > * **2010-11-09 11:49:15.320 > > > CET|2|database1|10.19.0.51(18895)|20929|SELECT|4cd926fd.51c1|2010-11-= 09 > > > 11:48:29 CET|10/417796|1390150|postgres| LOG: duration: 1518.422 ms > > > execute : SELECT id_token_fk,xxxxxxxxx ORDER BY avadate* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:52:25.364 > > > CET|1|database1|10.19.0.51(23286)|21566|PARSE|4cd927cf.543e|2010-11-09 > > > 11:51:59 CET|7/430041|0|postgres| ERROR: could not open relation > > > base/273198960/273198979: No such file or directory* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:52:25.364 > > > CET|2|database1|10.19.0.51(23286)|21566|PARSE|4cd927cf.543e|2010-11-09 > > > 11:51:59 CET|7/430041|0|postgres| STATEMENT: SELECT > > id_token_fkxxxxxxxxxxx > > > ORDER BY avadate* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:52:29.981 > > > CET|3|database1|10.19.0.51(23286)|21566|PARSE|4cd927cf.543e|2010-11-09 > > > 11:51:59 CET|7/430049|0|postgres| ERROR: could not open relation > > > base/273198960/273199235: No such file or directory* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:52:30.988 > > > CET|6|database1|10.19.0.51(23286)|21566|PARSE|4cd927cf.543e|2010-11-09 > > > 11:51:59 CET|7/430050|0|postgres| STATEMENT: SELECT max(avadate) > > xxxxxxxx > > > 32036)* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:36.346 > > > CET|16|database2|10.19.0.42(44916)|22107|SELECT|4cd9280e.565b|2010-11= =2D09 > > > 11:53:02 CET|94/516004|0|postgres| STATEMENT: SELECT * FROM "photos" > > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxx LIMIT 1* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:37.956 > > > CET|17|database2|10.19.0.42(44916)|22107|SELECT|4cd9280e.565b|2010-11= =2D09 > > > 11:53:02 CET|94/516025|0|postgres| ERROR: could not open relation > > > base/271253899/271254075: No such file or directory* > > > * **................* > > > * **................* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:55.560 CET|111|||26090||4cc6e970.65ea|2010-10-26 > > > 16:45:04 CEST||0|| ERROR: could not open relation > > base/273198960/273199235: > > > No such file or directory* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:55.560 CET|112|||26090||4cc6e970.65ea|2010-10-26 > > > 16:45:04 CEST||0|| CONTEXT: writing block 8866 of relation > > > base/273198960/273199235* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:55.560 CET|113|||26090||4cc6e970.65ea|2010-10-26 > > > 16:45:04 CEST||0|| WARNING: could not write block 8866 of > > > base/273198960/273199235* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:55.560 CET|114|||26090||4cc6e970.65ea|2010-10-26 > > > 16:45:04 CEST||0|| DETAIL: Multiple failures --- write error might be > > > permanent.* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:56.590 CET|115|||26090||4cc6e970.65ea|2010-10-26 > > > 16:45:04 CEST||0|| ERROR: could not open relation > > base/273198960/273199235: > > > No such file or directory* > > > * **2010-11-09 11:53:56.590 CET|116|||26090||4cc6e970.65ea|2010-10-26 > > > 16:45:04 CEST||0|| CONTEXT: writing block 8866 of relation > > > base/273198960/273199235* > > > > > > See that there are 2 different databases involved. (database1 and > > > database2). > > > > > > Looking for distinct errors (among the many we have in the log) I find > > there > > > are only 4 involved ... > > > > > > * **base/271253899/271254075* > > > * **base/273198960/273198979* > > > * **base/273198960/273199235* > > > * **base/273198960/273199253* > > > > > > and those files are not in the postgres base directory. > > > > > > To fix it we have no option but to restart postgres (which restarts f= ine > > > with a /etc/init.d/postgresql stop & start) > > > However, once we restarted postgres some data was corrupted. Tables t= hat > > > used to have 4,5 million rows had only 60 rows. As a consequence we h= ad > > to > > > restore from file system backup. > > > Once we did that, it worked fine for a few days until it happened aga= in. > > > We're worried it can happen again! > > > > > > Could this error be a hardware problem? > > > We recently increased the memory from 8GB to 28GB, although it was > > working > > > fine for more than 3 weeks. > > > We also recently upgraded from postgres 8.3.6 to 8.4.5, althought it = also > > > worked fine for a few months. > > > Upgrading to postgres 9 is easy for us. however, not sure that would > > help. > > > > > > Some info of our server: > > > > > > OS: Centos 5.5 > > > Kernel: 2.6.18-194.1.el5 > > > Postgres version: 8.4.5 (installation out-of-the-box using yum) > > > Server memory: 28GB > > > > > > > > > Any help would be appreciated > > > > > > Pablo > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Achilleas Mantzios > > > > -- > > Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) > > To make changes to your subscription: > > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin > > >=20 =2D-=20 Achilleas Mantzios