Re: new heapcheck contrib module

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: new heapcheck contrib module
Дата
Msg-id CAH2-WzmS+=4xcjZev-6XAC0opsCm1rTo1AGx1rW5ZVhbrrjS-g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: new heapcheck contrib module  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: new heapcheck contrib module  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: new heapcheck contrib module  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:02 AM Mark Dilger
<mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> I'm indifferent about that change.  Done for v13.

Moving on with verification of the same index in the event of B-Tree
index corruption is a categorical mistake. verify_nbtree.c was simply
not designed to work that way.

You were determined to avoid allowing any behavior that can result in
a backend crash in the event of corruption, but this design will
defeat various measures I took to avoid crashing with corrupt data
(e.g. in commit a9ce839a313).

What's the point in not just giving up on the index (though not
necessarily the table or other indexes) at the first sign of trouble,
anyway? It makes sense for the heap structure, but not for indexes.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "David G. Johnston"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Document "59.2. Built-in Operator Classes" have a clerical error?
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: new heapcheck contrib module