Re: pg_amcheck contrib application

From: Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_amcheck contrib application
Date: 2021-03-23 19:20:35
Message-ID: 8CE17574-003D-4FFB-8C87-9BB119E8E813@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Mar 23, 2021, at 12:05 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 005 is doing "logical"
> damage rather than "physical" damage, and I don't see why autovacuum
> should misbehave in that kind of case. In fact, the fact that
> autovacuum can handle such cases is one of the selling points for the
> whole design of vacuum, as opposed to, for example, retail index
> lookups.

That is a good point. Checking that autovacuum behaves sensibly despite sort order breakage sounds reasonable, but test 005 doesn't do that reliably, because it does nothing to make sure that autovacuum runs against the affected table during the short window when the affected table exists. All the same, I don't see that turning autovacuum off is required. If autovacuum is broken in this regard, we may get occasional, hard to reproduce build farm failures, but that would be more informative than no failures at all.


Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 2021-03-23 19:22:04 Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2021-03-23 19:19:06 Re: Change default of checkpoint_completion_target