Re: pg_verify_checksums failure with hash indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: pg_verify_checksums failure with hash indexes
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1Krp=z-105OvDFm90usNNH9jOdTEM2UTvhN+=hygQgo4A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_verify_checksums failure with hash indexes  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pg_verify_checksums failure with hash indexes  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 1:42 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have tested pg_upgrade with different block size (1K, 4K, 8K, 32K).
> The upgrade is working fine from v10 to v11 and I am able to fetch
> data with index scan on the hash index after an upgrade.
>

Thanks,  do you see any way to write a test for this patch?  AFAICS,
there is no existing test for a different block size and not sure if
there is an easy way to write one.  I feel it is not a bad idea if we
have some tests for different block sizes.  Recently, during zheap
development, we found that we have introduced a bug for a non-default
block size and we can't find that because we don't have any test for
it and the same happens here.

Does anybody else have any idea on how can we write a test for
non-default block size or if we already have anything similar?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: pointless check in RelationBuildPartitionDesc
Next
From: Haribabu Kommi
Date:
Subject: Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take