| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Victor Yegorov <vyegorov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Date: | 2016-05-18 22:25:39 |
| Message-ID: | 15044.1463610339@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Maybe this is the wrong perspective. I mean, is there a reason we even
> need this option, other than a lack of any other way to do a full table
> scan to check for corruption, etc.? If we're only doing this for
> integrity checking, then maybe it's better if it becomes a function,
> which could be later extended with additional forensic features?
Yes, I've been wondering that too. VACUUM is not meant as a corruption
checker, and should not be made into one, so what is the point of this
flag exactly?
(AFAIK, "select count(*) from table" would offer a similar amount of
sanity checking as a full-table VACUUM scan does, so it's not like
we've removed functionality with no near-term replacement.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-05-18 22:34:36 | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-05-18 21:57:49 | Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress |