Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86AFA2E2D58 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:30:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39080-06 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:30:44 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from cronos.madness.at (madness.at [217.196.146.217]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622F82E010D for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:30:44 -0300 (ADT) Received: from congw.dc1.conova.com ([217.196.145.250] helo=[192.168.1.61]) by cronos.madness.at with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JZSuV-0008Pd-T2; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:30:37 +0100 Message-ID: <47D7F733.6000908@kaltenbrunner.cc> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:30:59 +0100 From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.14pre (X11/20080208) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Page CC: Alvaro Herrera , Bruce Momjian , PostgreSQL www Subject: Re: Email not searchable in our archives References: <200803112135.m2BLZ6625071@momjian.us> <20080312130902.GC4926@alvh.no-ip.org> <937d27e10803120714h21f1f661s657fad641f35c3d5@mail.gmail.com> <937d27e10803120825k67fc19c1h27f977a8038dfdd7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <937d27e10803120825k67fc19c1h27f977a8038dfdd7@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200803/257 X-Sequence-Number: 14376 Dave Page wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Dave Page wrote: >> Confirmed. I added a test mode to a copy of the archives indexer, and >> running that it claims it would index a further 715 messages, which >> would give us a total of 1187. >> >> So I guess the next step is to try running out of test mode to see if >> the data actually makes it into the index now, but I didn't want to do >> that and stomp on any testing you're doing. > > OK, so running it properly has added those missing 715 messages. I > think we need to run a full index run which should restore any missing > pages, but before we do that, I'd kinda like to gather any ideas on > why this has happened before removing any evidence. hmm weird ... > > My best guess is simply that the indexer failed for some time and > noone noticed for a few weeks. By the time it was re-run, some > messages that it had missed were outside the timeframe that an > incremental crawl would have picked up (the current, plus last month). > Thoughts? > > Stefan; any thoughts on how we might monitor that the indexer has been > running correctly? I assume that should be fairly easy if we have it > drop a timestamp someplace? yes - iirc there is even some discussion on that on pmt - will work something out for that in the next days. Stefan