Re: GiST wal_consistency_checking issue

On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 7:53 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> batta tests wal_consistency_checking (maybe it's the only buildfarm
> member doing so), and did not detect anything:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=batta&br=master
>
> Your patch is not adding any tests, and I am pretty sure that recovery
> test 027 would fail because standbys stop on an inconsistency.

We already have test coverage for LP_DEAD marking GiST index tuples in
src/test/modules/index/specs/killtuples.spec (plus coverage for all
other index AMs that support this optimization). What we lack is test
coverage for the code that deals with subsequent deletion of those
LP_DEAD-marked tuples by gistprunepage (and so gistRedoDeleteRecord,
its REDO routine, also isn't tested).

Attached v2 adds this missing test coverage.

I verified that hash already has the same coverage for its
corresponding deletion routines.

--
Peter Geoghegan