| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(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>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL consistency check facility |
| Date: | 2016-08-28 05:50:16 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTbzU88Lit9Arhy=Ra2yp4w5aipuiQgFW-KbzEGYKZXbg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Right, I think there is no need to mask all the flags. However apart
> from BTP_HAS_GARBAGE, it seems we should mask BTP_SPLIT_END as that is
> just used to save some processing for vaccum and won't be set after
> crash recovery or on standby after WAL replay.
Right you are -- while BTP_INCOMPLETE_SPLIT is set during recovery,
BTP_SPLIT_END is not. Still, most of the btpo_flags flags that are
masked in the patch shouldn't be.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-08-28 06:13:51 | Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes. |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-08-28 04:47:28 | Re: WAL consistency check facility |