On 1/11/19 10:25 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 9:20 PM Tomas Vondra > On 1/11/19 7:40 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > But I'm tentatively in favor of your proposal anyway, because it's > > pretty simple and cheap and might help people, and doing something > > noticeably better is probably annoyingly complicated. > > > > +1 > > Yeah, that's the idea behind it -- it's cheap, and an > early-warning-indicator.
+1
PFA is a patch to do this.
It tracks things that happen in the general backends. Possibly we should also consider counting the errors actually found when running base backups? OTOH, that part of the code doesn't really track things like databases (as it operates just on the raw data directory underneath), so that implementation would definitely not be as clean...
