Horton

Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: 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: 2017-11-29T05:48:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> My apologies for slacking here. I would still welcome some regression
> tests to stress the bloom API you are proposing! For now I am moving
> this patch to next CF.

I still don't think that regression tests as such make sense. However,
it seems like it might be a good idea to add a test harness for the
Bloom filter code. I actually wrote code like this for myself during
development, that could be cleaned up. The hardness can live in
source/src/test/modules/test_bloom_filter. We already do this for the
red-black tree library code, for example, and it seems like good
practice.

Would that address your concern? There would be an SQL interface, but
it would be trivial.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

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.