Received: from localhost (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B539FB48C for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:22:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32196-01 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:22:43 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969BE9FB3A5 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:22:43 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l5KFMb3a018181; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:22:38 -0400 (EDT) To: Kurt Overberg cc: Chris Browne , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Maintenance question / DB size anomaly... In-reply-to: References: <607iq0dlns.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com> <1FF54A1D-9085-4C9B-81F3-D860FB132D44@hotdogrecords.com> <16441.1182288819@sss.pgh.pa.us> <18495.1182295570@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4D1C51F2-79EA-4468-BF2D-1D5591BD8A3D@hotdogrecords.com> <1876.1182307875@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Kurt Overberg message dated "Wed, 20 Jun 2007 09:10:08 -0400" Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:22:37 -0400 Message-ID: <18180.1182352957@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200706/420 X-Sequence-Number: 25453 Kurt Overberg writes: > Okay, so the sl_log_1 TABLE looks okay. Its the indexes that seem to > be messed up, specifically sl_log_1_idx1 seems to think that there's >>> 300,000 rows in the table its associated with. I just want to fix > the index, really. I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. The VACUUM VERBOSE output you provided here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-06/msg00370.php shows clearly that there are lots of rows in the table as well as the indexes. A REINDEX would certainly cut the size of the indexes but it isn't going to do anything about the extraneous rows. When last heard from, you were working on getting pg_filedump output for some of the bogus rows --- what was the result? regards, tom lane