=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torsten_F=F6rtsch?= <torsten.foertsch@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On 21/07/14 16:17, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Could you trace through it and see where the results diverge? Also,
>> what's the actual size of the file on disk?
> After a fresh restart of the database I attached strace to the backend.
> There are only 2 lines in the output that mention that relation:
> open("base/25317/11790", O_RDWR) = 35
> lseek(35, 0, SEEK_END) = 8192
> This happened during this query:
> select get_raw_page(2836::oid::regclass::text, 'fsm', 1);
> Shouldn't it rather open 11790_fsm?
Doh. I looked right at this code in get_raw_page yesterday:
if (blkno >= RelationGetNumberOfBlocks(rel))
elog(ERROR, "block number %u is out of range for relation \"%s\"",
blkno, RelationGetRelationName(rel));
RelationGetNumberOfBlocks reports the length of the main fork ... but
this check is applied regardless of which fork we're reading. Should
be using RelationGetNumberOfBlocksInFork, of course.
regards, tom lane
