Re: WAL consistency check facility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kuntal Ghosh
Subject Re: WAL consistency check facility
Date
Msg-id CAGz5QC+b1c-tNRWqQ3E02dM+K2nxEZS5ny0epnLiv58pzWUuAg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL consistency check facility  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thank you. I've updated it accordingly.

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Right, I think there is no need to mask all the flags.  However apart
>> from BTP_HAS_GARBAGE, it seems we should mask BTP_SPLIT_END as that is
>> just used to save some processing for vaccum and won't be set after
>> crash recovery or on standby after WAL replay.
>
> Right you are -- while BTP_INCOMPLETE_SPLIT is set during recovery,
> BTP_SPLIT_END is not. Still, most of the btpo_flags flags that are
> masked in the patch shouldn't be.
>
>
> --
> Peter Geoghegan



-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is a newly created index contains the invalid LSN?
Next
From: Venkata B Nagothi
Date:
Subject: Re: patch proposal