Re: WAL consistency check facility

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: WAL consistency check facility
Date: 2016-11-03 09:54:11
Message-ID: CAB7nPqR084B-Q7aYssyeWnrPYaTFOtE40Wj_jxeXpw_034XGiQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> So, whenever we are required to use bimg_info flag, we should make
> sure that has_image
> is set.

OK, we are taking past each other here. There are two possible patterns:
- has_image is set, not apply, meaning that the image block is used
for consistency checks.
- has_image is set, as well as apply, meaning that the block needs to
be applied at redo.
So I mean exactly the same thing as you do. The point I am trying to
raise is that it would be meaningful to put in some code paths checks
of the type (apply && !has_image) and ERROR on them. Perhaps we could
just do that in xlogreader.c though. If having those checks external
to xlogreader.c makes sense, then using separate macros is more
portable.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2016-11-03 10:25:54 Re: Hash Indexes
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-11-03 09:52:33 Re: Push down more full joins in postgres_fdw