From: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Christensen <david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] add relation and block-level filtering to pg_waldump |
Date: | 2022-02-25 13:08:20 |
Message-ID: | ME3P282MB16670C9B30D1F1B799E534D8B63E9@ME3P282MB1667.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 20:48, David Christensen <david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com> wrote:
>> Cool. I think we can report an error instead of reading wal files,
>> if the tablespace, database, or relation is invalid. Does there any
>> WAL record that has invalid tablespace, database, or relation OID?
>
> The only sort of validity check we could do here is range checking for the underlying data types
> (which we certainly could/should add if it’s known to never be valid for the underlying types);
The invalid OID I said here is such as negative number and zero, for those
parameters, we do not need to read the WAL files, since it always invalid.
> non-existence of objects is a no-go, since that depends purely on the WAL range you are
> looking at and you’d have to, you know, scan it to see if it existed before marking as invalid. :)
>
Agreed.
--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-02-25 13:31:01 | Re: Add id's to various elements in protocol.sgml |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2022-02-25 13:06:29 | Expose JIT counters/timing in pg_stat_statements |