| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage |
| Date: | 2017-06-23 06:31:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqS7NALWcXLGjtmLXkS7jHWpMM+gxt9OYwmmhbNkPRAt5w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Amit Langote
<Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Initially, I had naively set wal_consistency_check = all before running
> make installcheck and then had to wait for a long time to confirm that WAL
> generated by the gin test indeed caused consistency check failure on the
> standby with the v1 patch.
wal_consistency_check = gin would have saved you a lot of I/O.
> But I can see Sawada-san's point that there should be some way for
> developers writing code that better had gone through WAL consistency
> checking facility to do it without much hassle. But then again, it may
> not be that frequent to need that.
Yeah, I have my own set of generic scripts for that. There could be a
set of modules out of the main check-world, the risk that those finish
rotting is high though...
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-06-23 06:37:44 | Re: Fix a typo in README.dependencies |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-06-23 06:25:38 | Re: Broken O(n^2) avoidance in wal segment recycling. |