Re: Gotchas about pg_verify_checksums - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Gotchas about pg_verify_checksums
Date
Msg-id CAH2-Wzmew+B-M1rjrFSF4+LdHEGcHrrzCONYP-HhL172MxJOQg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Gotchas about pg_verify_checksums  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> Peter, the code does the right thing as it requires the instance's
> control file state to be either DB_SHUTDOWNED_IN_RECOVERY or
> DB_SHUTDOWNED.  The documentation, on the contrary, implies that
> the instance just needs to be offline, which can be anything as long as
> the postmaster is stopped.  That's how I understand the current
> wording.

I see. The problem is clearly the documentation, then.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Keep one postmaster monitoring pipe per process
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: Partitioned tables and covering indexes