> I've a small concern in 0001. The new guard uses only RelationNeedsWAL(reln), > but ProcessSingleRelationByOid() iterates all forks. For unlogged relations, > the init fork is special, there are several existing call sites that preserve > WAL for INIT_FORKNUM, for example using > > RelationNeedsWAL(rel) || forknum == INIT_FORKNUM > > and catalog/storage.c notes that unlogged init forks need WAL and sync. > > So I think the condition in ProcessSingleRelationFork() should preserve the > init-fork case, e.g. > > if (RelationNeedsWAL(reln) || forkNum == INIT_FORKNUM) > log_newpage_buffer(buf, false);
Which failure scenario are you thinking about here? When dealing with the catalog relation I can see the need but here we are reading, and writing, data pages. In which case would we need to issue an FPI for an unlogged relation init fork? I might be missing something obvious here.
Good catch,IIUC init page has valid checksum and when we set checksum on primary I think we need to pass it to standby. Otherwise, after failover we may see invalid checksum for unlogged relations. I haven’t validated it, will test it and update the patch.
