Re: B-tree parent pointer and checkpoints

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 10.03.2011 22:50, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> Has this been addressed?
>> 
>> I see we have with this commit:
>> 
>> 9de3aa65f01fb51cbc725e8508ea233e4e92c46c

> We fixed GiST. B-tree still has the issue that if you have a checkpoint 
> in the middle of an insert, and crash, you might be left with a leaf 
> node without a downlink in the parent.

But that will be fixed during WAL replay.

> That's relatively harmless, index searches and insertions work without 
> the downlink. However, there's code in page deletion that ERRORs if the 
> parent can't be found. That should be fixed.

I don't like the idea of removing that consistency check, and I don't
think it's necessary to do so.
        regards, tom lane