Paul Schlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - however regardless, if some form of error detection ends up being
> implemented, it might be nice to actually log corrupted blocks of data
> along with their previously computed checksums for subsequent analysis
> in an effort to ascertain if there's an opportunity to improve its
> implementation based on this more concrete real-world information.
This feature is getting overdesigned, I think. It's already the case
that we log an error complaining that thus-and-such a page is corrupt.
Once PG has decided that it won't have anything to do with the page at
all --- it can't load it into shared buffers, so it won't write it
either. So the user can go inspect the page at leisure with whatever
tools seem handy. I don't see a need for more verbose logging.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
