| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | surya poondla <suryapoondla4(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rahul <rahul(at)rhyadav(dot)dev>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ju Grigorev <ju(dot)grigorev(at)ftdata(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong LSN in WAL decoding error messages |
| Date: | 2026-11-02 01:44:47 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwGe10jCmx2bAH-Rt0-0Kb=thk-qtsAq7NQTVGNPvoFAnQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 12:52 AM surya poondla <suryapoondla4(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Also, what do you think about 0002? It makes pg_waldump's "error in WAL record at" prefix show where reading failed, instead of the last
> good record.
EndRecPtr is the starting position for the next read, which does not
always correspond to the start of the failing record. No? For example,
if decoding fails on the first record after a page header, EndRecPtr
still points to the start of the page? So if the goal is to report
the exact location of the failing record, isn't this change insufficient?
OTOH, if the goal is consistency with pg_rewind and pg_walinspect,
I'm fine with using EndRecPtr. But, as with 0001, I don't think the test
change in 0002 is necessary.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Guo | 2026-11-02 01:45:33 | Re: bug: query returns different result with and without memoization. |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-11-02 00:56:19 | Re: Racing in ROLLBACK PREAPRED and checkpoint |