On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 08:11:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Karsten Hilbert <Karsten.Hilbert@xxxxxxx> writes: > >>> According to > >>> http://www.databasesoup.com/2013/10/de-corrupting-toast-tables.html > >>> an UPDATE of the row is recommended -- should that work > >>> better than a DELETE ? > > > OK, got that. What I now don't understand is how the UPDATE > > won't have to touch the TOAST table when the TOASTed value > > *is* UPDATEd: > > update blobs.doc_obj set data = '' where pk = the_faulty_row; > > (data is the BYTEA column) > > It makes no sense to me either; I wonder if Josh's recipe ever > really worked? But it's clearly not working now, and that's > what I'd expect, because any mechanism for removing the busted > toast reference is going to cause the system to try to mark > the toast rows deleted. > > Since you reindexed the toast table and it still doesn't find > the missing chunks, The user has reported that gratuitious and repeated use of REINDEX/VACUUM has eventually led to a consistent database. That one row went missing but can be re-created. Unfortunately, I neither have the original data for testing (it is a medical record database and the client won't hand out copies for obvious reasons) nor can I ascertain the exact order of steps they eventually took. For the record. Thanks, Karsten -- GPG 40BE 5B0E C98E 1713 AFA6 5BC0 3BEA AC80 7D4F C89B
