On Fri, 2025-09-12 at 22:09 +0530, Tushar Takate wrote: > PostgreSQL version: 15.12 > Disk type: RAID5 > OS: RHEL 8.10 > > Error/Issue : > > vacuumdb: error: processing of database "live_order_us_db" failed: ERROR: found xmin 4133102167 from before relfrozenxid 4151440783 > > 2025-09-11 02:29:58.888 UTC,,,2362287,,68c233e1.240hbf,1,,2025-09-11 02:28:49 UTC,122/46371006,0,ERROR,XX001,"found xmin 4133102167 from before relfrozenxid 4151440783",,,,,"while scanning block 5821149 offset 5 of relation ""public.order"" > 2025-09-11 02:40:50.361 UTC,"prod_user_ap","live_order_us_db",2375672,"127.0.0.1:59344",68c2342b.243ff8,4,"VACUUM",2025-09-11 02:30:03 UTC,169/38875732,0,ERROR,XX001,"found xmin 4133102167 from before relfrozenxid 4151440783",,,,,"while scanning block 5821149 offset 5 of relation ""public.order""","VACUUM (VERBOSE, ANALYZE) public.order;",,,"vacuumdb","client backend",,-5528190995457849841
That is probably caused by a PostgreSQL bug; you can get rid of the message
In which version can we expect the fix for it? Also, can you please help to understand which specific condition or scenario is triggering this PostgreSQL error and skipping to freeze xmin?
by creating the "pg_surgery" extension and running
I agree we can run pg_surgery , but the question is how safe it is to run for large and mission-critical tables over 200GB.
From pg_surgery doc: These functions are unsafe by design and using them may corrupt (or further corrupt) your database
> One more thing/observation we saw in the PostgreSQL logs : > > The following message consistently appeared once a day during the past week > > 2025-09-10 23:33:14.469 UTC,,,157915,,68c21a46.268fb,3,,2025-09-10 23:31:18 UTC,45/49119328,0,WARNING,01000,"page is not marked all-visible but visibility map bit is set in relation ""order"" page 5815453",,,,,"while scanning block 5815453 of relation ""public.order""",,,,"","autovacuum worker",,0 > > What specific condition or scenario is triggering this PostgreSQL error? Can it be classified > as a bug? If not, what’s a safe and efficient way to resolve it without relying on a dump > and restore, particularly for large, mission-critical tables over 200GB?
That is some kind of data corruption, perhaps caused by a bug, perhaps by something else. The autovacuum run should fix that problem.
This is something supporting data I have provided, before the issue, the above WARNING was seen in db-logs for the same table.
