David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 at 03:53, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Could we move the knowledge of exactly which context type it is out
>> of the per-chunk header and keep it in the block header?
> I wasn't 100% clear on your opinion about using 010 vs expanding the
> bit-space. Based on the following it sounded like you were not
> outright rejecting the idea of consuming the 010 pattern.
What I said earlier was that 010 was the least bad choice if we
fail to do any expansibility work; but I'm not happy with failing
to do that.
Basically, I'm not happy with consuming the last reasonably-available
pattern for a memory context type that has little claim to being the
Last Context Type We Will Ever Want. Rather than making a further
dent in our ability to detect corrupted chunks, we should do something
towards restoring the expansibility that existed in the original
design. Then we can add bump contexts and whatever else we want.
regards, tom lane