On 4/10/18 06:29, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > One of our 2ndQuadrant support customers recently reported a sudden rush > of TOAST errors post a crash recovery, nearly causing an outage. Most > errors read like this: > > ERROR: unexpected chunk number 0 (expected 1) for toast value nnnn
While researching this, I found that the terminology in this code is quite inconsistent. It talks about chunks ids, chunk indexes, chunk numbers, etc. seemingly interchangeably. The above error is actually about the chunk_seq, not about the chunk_id, as one might think.
The attached patch is my attempt to clean this up a bit. Thoughts?
While I agree that we should clean it up, I wonder if changing error text would be a good idea. These errors are being reported by a very long time and if we change the text, we might forget the knowledge about the past reports.
Also, "toast value" is same as "chunk_id". Should we clean up something there too? "chunk_seq number" -- should that be just "chunk_seq"?
