Horton

Re: HOT chain validation in verify_heapam()

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Himanshu Upadhyaya <upadhyaya.himanshu@gmail.com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2023-01-31T13:50:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 8:24 AM Himanshu Upadhyaya
<upadhyaya.himanshu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Before this we stop the node by "$node->stop;" and then only we progress to
> manual corruption. This will abort all running/in-progress transactions.
> So, if we create an in-progress transaction and comment "$node->stop;"
> then somehow all the code that we have for manual corruption does not work.
>
> I think it is required to stop the server and then only proceed for manual corruption?
> If this is the case then please suggest if there is a way to get an in-progress transaction
> that we can use for manual corruption.

How about using a prepared transaction?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Commits

  1. amcheck: Generalize one of the recently-added update chain checks.

  2. amcheck: Tighten up validation of redirect line pointers.

  3. amcheck: Fix verify_heapam for tuples where xmin or xmax is 0.

  4. amcheck: Fix a few bugs in new update chain validation.

  5. Fix new test case to work on (some?) big-endian architectures.

  6. Don't test HEAP_XMAX_INVALID when freezing xmax.