Re: Online enabling of checksums

Hi,

Am Sonntag, den 04.03.2018, 23:30 +0100 schrieb Daniel Gustafsson:
> Agreed. Looking at our current error messages, “in file” is conventionally
> followed by the filename. I do however think “calculated” is better than
> “expected” since it conveys clearly that the compared checksum is calculated by
> pg_verify_checksum and not read from somewhere.
>
> How about something like this?
>
> _(“%s: checksum mismatch in file \”%s\”, block %d: calculated %X, found %X”),
> progname, fn, blockno, csum, header->pd_checksum);

I still find that confusing, but maybe it's just me. I thought the one
in the pageheader is the "expected" checksum, and we compare the "found"
or "computed/calculated" (in the page itself) against it.

I had the same conversation with an external tool author, by the way:

https://github.com/uptimejp/postgres-toolkit/issues/48

Michael

--
Michael Banck
Projektleiter / Senior Berater
Tel.: +49 2166 9901-171
Fax: +49 2166 9901-100
Email: michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de

credativ GmbH, HRB Mönchengladbach 12080
USt-ID-Nummer: DE204566209
Trompeterallee 108, 41189 Mönchengladbach
Geschäftsführung: Dr. Michael Meskes, Jörg Folz, Sascha Heuer