From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add progress reporting to pg_verifybackup |
Date: | 2023-02-06 00:35:16 |
Message-ID: | Y+BLRLC2HZJQ61gO@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 12:32:15PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That seems rather OK seen from here. I'll see about getting that
> applied except if there is an objection of any kind.
Okay, I have looked at that again this morning and I've spotted one
tiny issue: specifying --progress with --skip-checksums does not
really make sense.
Ignoring entries with a bad size would lead to incorrect progress
report (for example, say an entry in the manifest has a largely
oversized size number), so your approach on this side is correct. The
application of the ignore list via -i is also correct, as a patch
matching with should_ignore_relpath() does not compute an extra size
for total_size.
I was also wondering for a few minutes while on it whether it would
have been cleaner to move the check for should_ignore_relpath()
directly in verify_file_checksum() and verify_backup_file(), but
nobody has complained about that as being a problem, either.
What do you think about the updated version attached?
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v4-0001-Add-progress-reporting-to-pg_verifybackup.patch | text/x-diff | 9.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey Borodin | 2023-02-06 00:44:53 | Re: Amcheck verification of GiST and GIN |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-02-06 00:07:50 | Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15 |