Re: amcheck verification for GiST

From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: amcheck verification for GiST
Date: 2019-09-06 06:20:12
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> 4 сент. 2019 г., в 2:13, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> написал(а):
> On 2019-Mar-29, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>> Here's updated patch with AccessShareLock.
>> I've tried to stress this with combination of random inserts, vaccuums and checks. This process neither failed, nor deadlocked.
>> The patch intentionally contains one superflous line to make gist logically broken. This triggers regression test of amcheck.
> How close are we to this being a committable patch? CF bot complains
> that it doesn't apply anymore (please rebase), but from past discussion
> it seems pretty close to ready.

Here's rebased version. Changes in v9:
* adjust to usage of table_open
* update new extension version
* check for main fork presence in GiST check too


Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-GiST-verification-function-for-amcheck-v9.patch application/octet-stream 22.9 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Smith, Peter 2019-09-06 06:34:51 RE: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS)
Previous Message Jeevan Chalke 2019-09-06 06:08:12 Re: basebackup.c's sendFile() ignores read errors