The amcheck module provides functions that allow you to
      verify the logical consistency of the structure of relations. If the
      structure appears to be valid, no error is raised.
    
      The functions verify various invariants in the
      structure of the representation of particular relations. The
      correctness of the access method functions behind index scans and
      other important operations relies on these invariants always
      holding. For example, certain functions verify, among other things,
      that all B-Tree pages have items in “logical” order (e.g.,
      for B-Tree indexes on text, index tuples should be in
      collated lexical order). If that particular invariant somehow fails
      to hold, we can expect binary searches on the affected page to
      incorrectly guide index scans, resulting in wrong answers to SQL
      queries.
    
Verification is performed using the same procedures as those used by index scans themselves, which may be user-defined operator class code. For example, B-Tree index verification relies on comparisons made with one or more B-Tree support function 1 routines. See Section 37.16.3 for details of operator class support functions.
      amcheck functions may only be used by superusers.
    
bt_index_check(index regclass, heapallindexed boolean) returns void
              
            
              bt_index_check tests that its target, a
              B-Tree index, respects a variety of invariants. Example usage:
            
test=# SELECT bt_index_check(index => c.oid, heapallindexed => i.indisunique),
               c.relname,
               c.relpages
FROM pg_index i
JOIN pg_opclass op ON i.indclass[0] = op.oid
JOIN pg_am am ON op.opcmethod = am.oid
JOIN pg_class c ON i.indexrelid = c.oid
JOIN pg_namespace n ON c.relnamespace = n.oid
WHERE am.amname = 'btree' AND n.nspname = 'pg_catalog'
-- Don't check temp tables, which may be from another session:
AND c.relpersistence != 't'
-- Function may throw an error when this is omitted:
AND c.relkind = 'i' AND i.indisready AND i.indisvalid
ORDER BY c.relpages DESC LIMIT 10;
 bt_index_check |             relname             | relpages 
----------------+---------------------------------+----------
                | pg_depend_reference_index       |       43
                | pg_depend_depender_index        |       40
                | pg_proc_proname_args_nsp_index  |       31
                | pg_description_o_c_o_index      |       21
                | pg_attribute_relid_attnam_index |       14
                | pg_proc_oid_index               |       10
                | pg_attribute_relid_attnum_index |        9
                | pg_amproc_fam_proc_index        |        5
                | pg_amop_opr_fam_index           |        5
                | pg_amop_fam_strat_index         |        5
(10 rows)
            
              This example shows a session that performs verification of the
              10 largest catalog indexes in the database “test”.
              Verification of the presence of heap tuples as index tuples is
              requested for the subset that are unique indexes. Since no
              error is raised, all indexes tested appear to be logically
              consistent. Naturally, this query could easily be changed to
              call bt_index_check for every index in the
              database where verification is supported.
            
              bt_index_check acquires an AccessShareLock
              on the target index and the heap relation it belongs to. This lock mode
              is the same lock mode acquired on relations by simple
              SELECT statements.
              bt_index_check does not verify invariants
              that span child/parent relationships, but will verify the
              presence of all heap tuples as index tuples within the index
              when heapallindexed is
              true. When a routine, lightweight test for
              corruption is required in a live production environment, using
              bt_index_check often provides the best
              trade-off between thoroughness of verification and limiting the
              impact on application performance and availability.
            
bt_index_parent_check(index regclass, heapallindexed boolean, rootdescend boolean) returns void
              
            
              bt_index_parent_check tests that its
              target, a B-Tree index, respects a variety of invariants.
              Optionally, when the heapallindexed
              argument is true, the function verifies the
              presence of all heap tuples that should be found within the
              index, and that there are no missing downlinks in the index
              structure. When the optional rootdescend
              argument is true, verification re-finds
              tuples on the leaf level by performing a new search from the
              root page for each tuple. The checks that can be performed by
              bt_index_parent_check are a superset of the
              checks that can be performed by bt_index_check.
              bt_index_parent_check can be thought of as
              a more thorough variant of bt_index_check:
              unlike bt_index_check,
              bt_index_parent_check also checks
              invariants that span parent/child relationships.
              bt_index_parent_check follows the general
              convention of raising an error if it finds a logical
              inconsistency or other problem.
            
              A ShareLock is required on the target index by
              bt_index_parent_check (a
              ShareLock is also acquired on the heap relation).
              These locks prevent concurrent data modification from
              INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE
              commands. The locks also prevent the underlying relation from
              being concurrently processed by VACUUM, as well as
              all other utility commands. Note that the function holds locks
              only while running, not for the entire transaction.
            
              bt_index_parent_check's additional
              verification is more likely to detect various pathological
              cases. These cases may involve an incorrectly implemented
              B-Tree operator class used by the index that is checked, or,
              hypothetically, undiscovered bugs in the underlying B-Tree index
              access method code. Note that
              bt_index_parent_check cannot be used when
              Hot Standby mode is enabled (i.e., on read-only physical
              replicas), unlike bt_index_check.
            
heapallindexed Verification
        When the heapallindexed argument to
        verification functions is true, an additional
        phase of verification is performed against the table associated with
        the target index relation. This consists of a “dummy”
        CREATE INDEX operation, which checks for the
        presence of all hypothetical new index tuples against a temporary,
        in-memory summarizing structure (this is built when needed during
        the basic first phase of verification). The summarizing structure
        “fingerprints” every tuple found within the target
        index. The high level principle behind
        heapallindexed verification is that a new
        index that is equivalent to the existing, target index must only
        have entries that can be found in the existing structure.
      
        The additional heapallindexed phase adds
        significant overhead: verification will typically take several times
        longer. However, there is no change to the relation-level locks
        acquired when heapallindexed verification is
        performed.
      
        The summarizing structure is bound in size by
        maintenance_work_mem. In order to ensure that
        there is no more than a 2% probability of failure to detect an
        inconsistency for each heap tuple that should be represented in the
        index, approximately 2 bytes of memory are needed per tuple. As
        less memory is made available per tuple, the probability of missing
        an inconsistency slowly increases. This approach limits the
        overhead of verification significantly, while only slightly reducing
        the probability of detecting a problem, especially for installations
        where verification is treated as a routine maintenance task. Any
        single absent or malformed tuple has a new opportunity to be
        detected with each new verification attempt.
      
amcheck Effectively
        amcheck can be effective at detecting various types of
        failure modes that data page
            checksums will always fail to catch. These include:
      
Structural inconsistencies caused by incorrect operator class implementations.
              This includes issues caused by the comparison rules of operating
              system collations changing. Comparisons of datums of a collatable
              type like text must be immutable (just as all
              comparisons used for B-Tree index scans must be immutable), which
              implies that operating system collation rules must never change.
              Though rare, updates to operating system collation rules can
              cause these issues. More commonly, an inconsistency in the
              collation order between a master server and a standby server is
              implicated, possibly because the major operating
              system version in use is inconsistent. Such inconsistencies will
              generally only arise on standby servers, and so can generally
              only be detected on standby servers.
            
If a problem like this arises, it may not affect each individual index that is ordered using an affected collation, simply because indexed values might happen to have the same absolute ordering regardless of the behavioral inconsistency. See Section 23.1 and Section 23.2 for further details about how PostgreSQL uses operating system locales and collations.
              Structural inconsistencies between indexes and the heap relations
              that are indexed (when heapallindexed
              verification is performed).
            
There is no cross-checking of indexes against their heap relation during normal operation. Symptoms of heap corruption can be subtle.
Corruption caused by hypothetical undiscovered bugs in the underlying PostgreSQL access method code, sort code, or transaction management code.
              Automatic verification of the structural integrity of indexes
              plays a role in the general testing of new or proposed
              PostgreSQL features that could plausibly allow a
              logical inconsistency to be introduced. Verification of table
              structure and associated visibility and transaction status
              information plays a similar role. One obvious testing strategy
              is to call amcheck functions continuously
              when running the standard regression tests. See Section 32.1 for details on running the tests.
            
File system or storage subsystem faults where checksums happen to simply not be enabled.
              Note that amcheck examines a page as represented in some
              shared memory buffer at the time of verification if there is only a
              shared buffer hit when accessing the block. Consequently,
              amcheck does not necessarily examine data read from the
              file system at the time of verification. Note that when checksums are
              enabled, amcheck may raise an error due to a checksum
              failure when a corrupt block is read into a buffer.
            
Corruption caused by faulty RAM, or the broader memory subsystem.
PostgreSQL does not protect against correctable memory errors and it is assumed you will operate using RAM that uses industry standard Error Correcting Codes (ECC) or better protection. However, ECC memory is typically only immune to single-bit errors, and should not be assumed to provide absolute protection against failures that result in memory corruption.
              When heapallindexed verification is
              performed, there is generally a greatly increased chance of
              detecting single-bit errors, since strict binary equality is
              tested, and the indexed attributes within the heap are tested.
            
        In general, amcheck can only prove the presence of
        corruption; it cannot prove its absence.
      
        No error concerning corruption raised by amcheck should
        ever be a false positive. amcheck raises
        errors in the event of conditions that, by definition, should never
        happen, and so careful analysis of amcheck
        errors is often required.
      
        There is no general method of repairing problems that
        amcheck detects. An explanation for the root cause of
        an invariant violation should be sought. pageinspect may play a useful role in diagnosing
        corruption that amcheck detects. A REINDEX
        may not be effective in repairing corruption.