Re: new heapcheck contrib module

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: new heapcheck contrib module
Date: 2020-05-13 22:10:51
Message-ID: 20200513221051.GA26592@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-May-12, Peter Geoghegan wrote:

> > The point is that when checking the table for corruption I avoid
> > calling anything that might assert (or segfault, or whatever).
>
> I don't think that you can expect to avoid assertion failures in
> general.

Hmm. I think we should (try to?) write code that avoids all crashes
with production builds, but not extend that to assertion failures.
Sticking again with the provided example,

> I'll stick with your example. You're calling
> TransactionIdDidCommit() from check_tuphdr_xids(), which will
> interrogate the commit log and pg_subtrans. It's just not under your
> control.

in a production build this would just fail with an error that the
pg_xact file cannot be found, which is fine -- if this happens in a
production system, you're not disturbing any other sessions. Or maybe
the file is there and the byte can be read, in which case you would get
the correct response; but that's fine too.

I don't know to what extent this is possible.

--
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 David Rowley 2020-05-13 22:19:59 Re: [PATCH] Keeps tracking the uniqueness with UniqueKey
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2020-05-13 21:33:07 Re: new heapcheck contrib module