Re: Possible mistake in Section 63.6 - 9.6devel Documentation - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Possible mistake in Section 63.6 - 9.6devel Documentation
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqSV1kR6FqWf2rOVter5cXAW8oTH+DKZjwP4Meji5do5wg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Possible mistake in Section 63.6 - 9.6devel Documentation  (Vignesh Raghunathan <vignesh.pgsql@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Possible mistake in Section 63.6 - 9.6devel Documentation
List pgsql-docs
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Vignesh Raghunathan
<vignesh.pgsql@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It has been mentioned in Section 63.6 that the first two fields in
> PageHeaderData track the most recent WAL entry related to the page. However,
> I am not sure how pd_checksum is related to WAL. Could it be possible that
> the sentence has been carried over from previous versions of the
> documentations without considering the change to the second field in
> PageHeaderData?

Yes, the documentation is mistaken. The two bytes of pd_tli have been
switched to pd_checksum in 9.3, hence only the first field is relevant
for WAL, aka pd_lsn. Looking at this portion of the docs I think that
it should be updated as attached, mentioning pd_checksum as well.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Vignesh Raghunathan
Date:
Subject: Possible mistake in Section 63.6 - 9.6devel Documentation
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Fwd: Publishing PG docs