On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 16:05 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> The other concern I remember being expressed (and not just by me, but
> by a number of people) is that your patch turns loss of a visibility
> map bit into a data corruption scenario, which it currently isn't.
> Right now, if your visibility map gets corrupted, you can always
> recover by deleting it. Under your proposal that would no longer be
> possible. I think that's sufficient grounds to reject the patch by
> itself, even if there were no other issues. If that doesn't strike
> you as very dangerous, I'm baffled as to why not.
Can you point me to that criticism? Why can't you just drop the VM
completely if it becomes corrupted?
(You might be referring to another idea of mine that was related to
Andres's proposal for "getting rid of freezing".)
Regards,Jeff Davis