Re: amcheck verification for GiST

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: amcheck verification for GiST
Date: 2019-09-03 21:13:51
Message-ID: 20190903211351.GA19878@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Mar-29, Andrey Borodin wrote:

> Here's updated patch with AccessShareLock.
> I've tried to stress this with combination of random inserts, vaccuums and checks. This process neither failed, nor deadlocked.
> The patch intentionally contains one superflous line to make gist logically broken. This triggers regression test of amcheck.

How close are we to this being a committable patch? CF bot complains
that it doesn't apply anymore (please rebase), but from past discussion
it seems pretty close to ready.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-09-03 21:15:32 Re: Attempt to consolidate reading of XLOG page
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-09-03 21:10:50 Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm for partition-wise join