Horton

Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification

Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-03-28T12:47:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:

>
> I don't think so. The transaction involved is still an ordinary user
> transaction.
>
>
Mostly a nitpick, but I guess we should leave a comment
after IndexBuildHeapScan() saying heap_endscan() is not necessary
since IndexBuildHeapScan()
does that internally. I stumbled upon that while looking for any potential
leaks. I know at least one other caller of IndexBuildHeapScan() doesn't
bother to say anything either, but it's helpful.

FWIW I also looked at the 0001 patch and it looks fine to me.

Thanks,
Pavan
-- 
 Pavan Deolasee                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Fix non-portable use of round().

  2. Add amcheck verification of heap relations belonging to btree indexes.

  3. Add Bloom filter implementation.

  4. Use ereport not elog for some corrupt-HOT-chain reports.

  5. Introduce 64-bit hash functions with a 64-bit seed.

  6. Upgrade src/port/rint.c to be POSIX-compliant.

  7. Use type "int64" for memory accounting in tuplesort.c/tuplestore.c.