On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 10:00 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 9:45 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> writes: > > > It's likely that the commit f6c5edb8abcac04eb3eac6da356e59d399b2bcef > > > is relevant. > > > > Noting that the errors have only appeared in the past couple of > > days, I'm now suspicious of adb466150b44d1eaf43a2d22f58ff4c545a0ed3f > > (Fix recovery_prefetch with low maintenance_io_concurrency). > > Yeah, I also just spotted the coincidence of those failures while > monitoring the build farm. I'll look into this later today. My > initial suspicion is that there was pre-existing code here that was > (incorrectly?) relying on the lack of error reporting in that case. > But maybe I misunderstood and it was incorrect to report the error for > some reason that was not robustly covered with tests.
After I wrote that I saw Sawada-san's message and waited for more information, and I see there was now a commit. I noticed that peripatus was already logging the 'missing contrecord' error even when it didn't fail the test, and still does. I'm still looking into that (ie whether I need to take that new report_invalid_record() call out and replace it with errormsg_deferred = true so that XLogReadRecord() returns NULL with no error message in this case).
