"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 10:07:35AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, in fact we'll have correctly recreated the page, so I'm not
>> thinking that it's necessary or desirable to check this.
> Would the suggestion made in
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-05/msg01374.php help
> in this regard?
That's exactly what we are debating: whether it's still necessary/useful
to make such a check, given that we now realize the failures are just
isolated bugs and not a systemic problem with truncated files.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Martijn van Oosterhout||Date: 2006-03-28 16:31:33|
|Subject: Re: Why are default encoding conversions|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-03-28 16:24:51|
|Subject: Re: Why are default encoding conversions |
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: karly||Date: 2006-03-28 16:31:35|
|Subject: Re: FAQ 1.1|
|Previous:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2006-03-28 16:26:26|
|Subject: Re: table owner of cloned databases|