Re: HOT chain validation in verify_heapam()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Himanshu Upadhyaya <upadhyaya(dot)himanshu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: HOT chain validation in verify_heapam()
Date: 2023-03-22 19:27:01
Message-ID: 1650745.1679513221@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I have committed this after tidying up a bunch of things in the test
> case file that I found too difficult to understand -- or in some cases
> just incorrect, like:

My animal mamba doesn't like this one bit.

I suspect the reason is that it's big-endian (PPC) and the endianness
hacking in the test is simply wrong:

syswrite($file,
pack("L", $ENDIANNESS eq 'little' ? 0x00010019 : 0x19000100))
or BAIL_OUT("syswrite failed: $!");

pack's L code should already be performing an endianness swap, so why
are we doing another one in the argument?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-03-22 19:38:09 Re: On login trigger: take three
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2023-03-22 19:23:18 Re: Request for comment on setting binary format output per session