Re: Online verification of checksums

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Fabien COELHO
Тема Re: Online verification of checksums
Дата
Msg-id alpine.DEB.2.21.1902171410130.3339@lancre
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Online verification of checksums  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
Ответы Re: Online verification of checksums  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hallo Mickael,

> So I have now changed behaviour so that short writes count as skipped
> files and pg_verify_checksums no longer bails out on them. When this
> occors a warning is written to stderr and their overall count is also
> reported at the end. However, unless there are other blocks with bad
> checksums, the exit status is kept at zero.

This seems fair when online, however I'm wondering whether it is when 
offline. I'd say that the whole retry logic should be skipped in this 
case? i.e. "if (block_retry || !online) { error message and continue }"
on both short read & checksum failure retries.

> New patch attached.

Patch applies cleanly, compiles, global & local make check ok.

I'm wondering whether it should exit(1) on "lseek" failures. Would it make 
sense to skip the file and report it as such? Should it be counted as a 
skippedfile?

WRT the final status, ISTM that slippedblocks & files could warrant an 
error when offline, although they might be ok when online?

-- 
Fabien.


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgbench MAX_ARGS
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?