Feedback-ID: i76984098:Fastmail
Message-ID: <7d455186-0cba-4fd5-9f9e-7051627b3ae3@aklaver.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2026 08:37:26 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Index (primary key) corrupt?
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com>,
 Wim Rouquart <wim.rouquart@kbc.be>
Cc: "pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
References: <AS2PR05MB1075477BA334D4DA262AD75BFEF16A@AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <58221272-d684-4799-a113-d5a5031a0b05@aklaver.com>
 <AS2PR05MB107541E760AECB8639BB968B5EF63A@AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <fd548bde-54d3-426a-a2b6-058750cfb554@aklaver.com>
 <AS2PR05MB1075432E74AF2FA975B02519AEF61A@AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <b1fec029-b8fb-4177-a01a-9457e813ce68@aklaver.com>
 <AS2PR05MB107546BEE7B8092148A0B51A0EF61A@AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <25b5291f-a3d3-4655-a3d3-57f28b70ec5a@aklaver.com>
 <AS2PR05MB107546C1B04FC4B3CCF32E60CEF7DA@AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <78328b08-249e-4251-8a10-b5dac183442a@aklaver.com>
 <DB5PR05MB107646FFE78759D1D5431F802EF7AA@DB5PR05MB10764.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <0868c260-9812-4629-b32d-026c1fe6089f@aklaver.com>
 <AS2PR05MB1075476F648651C8CC02D8048EF79A@AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAKAnmmLsxdt51sp-w0JxMi0haGXHFKD2pXURfOSOa5iVzjni4w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKAnmmLsxdt51sp-w0JxMi0haGXHFKD2pXURfOSOa5iVzjni4w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/7d455186-0cba-4fd5-9f9e-7051627b3ae3%40aklaver.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 3/9/26 8:24 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 10:12 AM Wim Rouquart <wim.rouquart@kbc.be 
> <mailto:wim.rouquart@kbc.be>> wrote:
> 
>     I already saw finding the actual cause as a 'lost cause' as these
>     things tend to happen, however what bothers me most is that a tool
>     like amcheck which is supposed to find corruption also shows up with
>     no result.
> 
> 
> Well, no, these things really should not happen. :)
> 
> It may be too late, but it would be real interesting to see this query 
> both before and after the REINDEX:
> 
> select * from pg_index where indrelid  = 'bcf_work_type'::regclass and 
> indisprimary;

Déjà vu :)

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKAnmmK9uKAcerhseNg6FSDOnMWmivM5ctUiTAdc1kobq94Dqw%40mail.gmail.com

This post in answer:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/AS2PR05MB107549DDE42DC0B8E31CB52BFEF90A%40AS2PR05MB10754.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com

would seem to indicate that is not the issue.

> 
> An incorrect indrelid is one way I can think of as to how pg_dump would 
> miss it, but that wouldn't explain why reindex would subsequently fix it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Greg
> 


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com