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.  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, including checking
      that there are no missing downlinks in the index structure.
      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.
     
    bt_index_check and
    bt_index_parent_check both output log
    messages about the verification process at
    DEBUG1 and DEBUG2 severity
    levels.  These messages provide detailed information about the
    verification process that may be of interest to
    PostgreSQL developers.  Advanced users
    may also find this information helpful, since it provides
    additional context should verification actually detect an
    inconsistency.  Running:
SET client_min_messages = DEBUG1;
in an interactive psql session before running a verification query will display messages about the progress of verification with a manageable level of detail.
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.