Horton

Re: [PATCH] Improve amcheck to also check UNIQUE constraint in btree index.

Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Maxim Orlov <m.orlov@postgrespro.ru>, lubennikovaav@gmail.com, Hamid Akhtar <hamid.akhtar@percona.com>
Date: 2023-10-30T07:29:04Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. amcheck: Optimize speed of checking for unique constraint violation

  2. amcheck: Report an error when the next page to a leaf is not a leaf

  3. amcheck: Don't load the right sibling page into BtreeCheckState

  4. amcheck: Refactoring the storage of the last visible entry

  5. Teach contrib/amcheck to check the unique constraint violation

  6. Add macros in hash and btree AMs to get the special area of their pages

Hi, Alexander!


On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 00:13, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 11:44 AM Aleksander Alekseev
> <aleksander@timescale.com> wrote:
> > > I think, this patch was marked as "Waiting on Author", probably, by mistake. Since recent changes were done without any significant code changes and CF bot how happy again.
> > >
> > > I'm going to move it to RfC, could I? If not, please tell why.
> >
> > I restored the "Ready for Committer" state. I don't think it's a good
> > practice to change the state every time the patch has a slight
> > conflict or something. This is not helpful at all. Such things happen
> > quite regularly and typically are fixed in a couple of days.
>
> This patch seems useful to me.  I went through the thread, it seems
> that all the critics are addressed.
>
> I've rebased this patch.   Also, I've run perltidy for tests, split
> long errmsg() into errmsg(), errdetail() and errhint(), and do other
> minor enchantments.
>
> I think this patch is ready to go.  I'm going to push it if there are
> no objections.
>
> ------
> Regards,
> Alexander Korotkov

It's very good that this long-standing patch is finally committed. Thanks a lot!

Regards,
Pavel Borisov