Re: Concurrency bug in amcheck

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alexander Korotkov
Тема Re: Concurrency bug in amcheck
Дата
Msg-id CAPpHfduNq4aR6Cdo7oWuGyOD46n4bG6Egd-kDWg0F2RQUXd-Ow@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Concurrency bug in amcheck  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Ответы Re: Concurrency bug in amcheck  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
Hi, Peter!

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:23 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 4:06 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:56 AM Alexander Korotkov
> <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> > Thank you.  2nd patch is proposed for master and makes btree page
> > unlink remove all the items from the page being deleted.
>
> This looks good, but can we do the
> wal_consistency_checking/btree_mask() improvement, too?

You never got around to committing the second patch (or the
wal_consistency_checking stuff). Are you planning on picking it up
again?

Thank you for your reminder.   Revised patch is attached.  Now, the contents of deleted btree pages isn't masked.  I've checked that installcheck passes with wal_consistency_checking='Btree'.  I'm going to push this if no objections.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov 
Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Since '2001-09-09 01:46:40'::timestamp microseconds are lost when extracting epoch
Следующее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: WIP: BRIN multi-range indexes