Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups
Date
Msg-id 20190806151337.iujm6c25sn4e72yl@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2019-08-06 10:58:15 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Michael Banck (michael.banck@credativ.de) wrote:
> > Independently of the whitelist/blacklist question, I believe
> > pg_checksums should not error out as soon as it encounters a weird looking
> > file, but either (i) still checksum it or (ii) skip it? Or is that to be
> > considered a pilot error and it's fine for pg_checksums to fold?
> 
> imv, random files that we don't know about are exactly 'pilot error' to
> be complained about..  This is exactly why the whitelist idea falls
> over.

I still think this whole assumption is bad, and that you're fixing
non-problems, and creating serious usability issues with zero benefits.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups
Next
From: Paul Jungwirth
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL:2011 PERIODS vs Postgres Ranges?