| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Grigory Smolkin <g(dot)smolkin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: amcheck assert failure |
| Date: | 2019-04-22 19:51:57 |
| Message-ID: | 23979.1555962717@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Grigory Smolkin <g(dot)smolkin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> On 04/22/2019 09:05 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> The ascii string "blablahblah" has been overwritten at byte offset
>> 1040 (from the beginning of the page). I would take a closer look at
>> what those tests do. Either the problem is in the tests, or your
>> database is haunted, which is outside my area of expertise.
> It`s data corruption test, but I`ve forgot to turn checksums on.
> I`m sorry for wasting your time.
Nonetheless ... do we really want an assertion failure rather than
some more-mundane error report? Seems like the point of amcheck
is to detect data corruption, so I'd rather get an ERROR than an
assertion (which would not fire in production builds anyway).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-04-22 20:31:08 | Re: amcheck assert failure |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-04-22 19:51:22 | Re: amcheck assert failure |