Re: Print physical file path when checksum check fails

From: Hubert Zhang <hzhang(at)pivotal(dot)io>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shawn Debnath <sdn(at)amazon(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Print physical file path when checksum check fails
Date: 2020-02-18 01:27:39
Message-ID: CAB0yremmEKPyvzdx9ufXSQ-4w_6QSkoY3xRgHu6_jLc-TC-VMQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 5:22 PM Hubert Zhang <hzhang(at)pivotal(dot)io> wrote:

> Thanks Andres,
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:30 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
>> HHi,
>>
>> On 2020-02-10 16:04:21 +0800, Hubert Zhang wrote:
>> > Currently we only print block number and relation path when checksum
>> check
>> > fails. See example below:
>> >
>> > ERROR: invalid page in block 333571 of relation base/65959/656195
>>
>> > DBA complains that she needs additional work to calculate which physical
>> > file is broken, since one physical file can only contain `RELSEG_SIZE`
>> > number of blocks. For large tables, we need to use many physical files
>> with
>> > additional suffix, e.g. 656195.1, 656195.2 ...
>> >
>> > Is that a good idea to also print the physical file path in error
>> message?
>> > Like below:
>> >
>> > ERROR: invalid page in block 333571 of relation base/65959/656195, file
>> > path base/65959/656195.2
>>
>> I think that'd be a nice improvement. But:
>>
>> I don't think the way you did it is right architecturally. The
>> segmenting is really something that lives within md.c, and we shouldn't
>> further expose it outside of that. And e.g. the undo patchset uses files
>> with different segmentation - but still goes through bufmgr.c.
>>
>> I wonder if this partially signals that the checksum verification piece
>> is architecturally done in the wrong place currently? It's imo not good
>> that every place doing an smgrread() needs to separately verify
>> checksums. OTOH, it doesn't really belong inside smgr.c.
>>
>>
>> This layering issue was also encountered in
>>
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=3eb77eba5a51780d5cf52cd66a9844cd4d26feb0
>> so perhaps we should work to reuse the FileTag it introduces to
>> represent segments, without hardcoding the specific segment size?
>>
>>
> I checked the FileTag commit. It calls `register_xxx_segment` inside md.c
> to store the sync request into a hashtable and used by checkpointer later.
>
> Checksum verify is simpler. We could move the `PageIsVerified` into md.c
> (mdread). But we can not elog error inside md.c because read buffer mode
> RBM_ZERO_ON_ERROR is at bugmgr.c level.
>
> One idea is to change save the error message(or the FileTag) at (e.g. a
> static string in bufmgr.c) by calling `register_checksum_failure` inside
> mdread in md.c.
>
> As for your concern about the need to do checksum verify after every
> smgrread, we now move the checksum verify logic into md.c, but we still
> need to check the checksum verify result after smgrread and reset buffer to
> zero if mode is RBM_ZERO_ON_ERROR.
>
> If this idea is OK, I will submit the new PR.
>
>
Based on Andres's comments, here is the new patch for moving checksum
verify logic into mdread() instead of call PageIsVerified in every
smgrread(). Also using FileTag to print the physical file name when
checksum verify failed, which handle segmenting inside md.c as well.

--
Thanks

Hubert Zhang

Attachment Content-Type Size
0002-Print-physical-file-path-when-verify-checksum-failed.patch application/octet-stream 11.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-02-18 01:55:59 Re: tiny documentation fix
Previous Message Corey Huinker 2020-02-18 01:25:41 Re: Resolving the python 2 -> python 3 mess