Re: Online checksums verification in the backend

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 01:20:47PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 09:21:22AM +0100, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:29:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> Based on the feedback gathered on this thread, I guess that you should
> >> have a SRF returning the list of broken blocks, as well as NOTICE
> >> messages.
> >
> > The current patch has an SRF and a WARNING message, do you want an additional
> > NOTICE message or downgrade the existing one?
>
> Right, not sure which one is better, for zero_damaged_pages a WARNING
> is used.


Sorry forgot to answer that.  IMHO a WARNING is better here, as we're talking
about data corruption.  Also, a WARNING will be reported to both the client and
server logs, which sounds like a good thing.