Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem?
Date
Msg-id 20140224233025.GC14104@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem?  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2014-02-24 15:20:13 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > TBH I don't care about torn pages during normal testing. I don't want to
> > suggest disabling it for real workloads with real data, just that it's
> > important to do so during development/testing of WAL related code,
> > because otherwise it will hide/fixup many errors.
> 
> Sure, but you might want to account for torn pages anyway.
> Particularly if you're interested in some degree of automation, as we
> all seem to be.

Hm, well. I have to admit, if a test machine crashes, I'd just rebuild
the cluster. Unless I am working on crash safety testing in which case
I'd probably not have full_page_writes disabled...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Another possible corruption bug in 9.3.2 or possibly a known MultiXact problem?
Next
From: Kouhei Kaigai
Date:
Subject: Re: contrib/cache_scan (Re: What's needed for cache-only table scan?)