On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 05:16:51PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 27.08.24 15:44, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:46 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com
>> <mailto:nathandbossart@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Should we error if both --data-checksum and --no-data-checksums are
>> specified? IIUC with 0001, we'll use whichever is specified last.
>>
>>
>> Hmmm, that is a good question. We have never (to my recollection)
>> flipped a default quite like this before. I'm inclined to leave it as
>> "last one wins", as I can see automated systems appending their desired
>> selection to the end of the arg list, and expecting it to work.
>
> Yes, last option wins is the normal expected behavior.
WFM
001_verify_heapam fails with this patch set. I think you may need to use
--no-data-checksums in that test, too. Otherwise, it looks pretty good to
me.
--
nathan
