Re: basebackup: do not verify checksums on pages written before enabling checksums

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: basebackup: do not verify checksums on pages written before enabling checksums
Date: 2026-08-15 20:45:01
Message-ID: D18C26A8-2D85-4F3C-B385-D37CD82B10D8@yesql.se
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 15 Aug 2026, at 16:30, Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Can we combine the two tests into a single 010_backup.pl to keep cluster
>> inits down?
>
> I reworked the tests with another injection point as part of this,
> this way they shouldn't be flaky on CI and they are significantly
> faster now.
>
>> I'm not sure that "since the server started" is enough for a backup taken from
>> a standby. XLogCtl is zeroed at startup, while the checksum state is restored
>> from pg_control. The standby can become available before replay reaches the
>> latest checksum transition, so verification could resume with
>> lastChecksumChangeRecPtr invalid.
>
> There was really an issue there, I think we can solve that by
> advancing minrecoverypoint. I kept a test case for this separate for
> now, as I am unsure if we want to include it in some form.
>
>> I think that an atomic would make more sense.
>
> Also done.

Thanks for the update! I am travelling today but will take a closer look
tomorrow evening when I am back again.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2026-08-15 21:53:39 Re: Crash issue in PG18.5 regression
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2026-08-15 20:02:35 Re: GIN VACUUM can corrupt internal posting tree pages