| From: | Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(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: | 2016-08-29 05:13:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAGz5QC+b1c-tNRWqQ3E02dM+K2nxEZS5ny0epnLiv58pzWUuAg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thank you. I've updated it accordingly.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> 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
--
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Venkata B Nagothi | 2016-08-29 05:17:16 | Re: patch proposal |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-08-29 03:46:07 | Re: PostgreSQL Version 10, missing minor version |