Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery
| От | Pavan Deolasee |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABOikdPZP5q0EbFibREgCE2PKb8ZRHJGwYHqCDnHkFaKeXDJEQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery
Re: Bugs in TOAST handling, OID assignment and redo recovery |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:53 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.
On 4/10/18 06:29, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> One of our 2ndQuadrant support customers recently reported a sudden rush
> of TOAST errors post a crash recovery, nearly causing an outage. Most
> errors read like this:
>
> ERROR: unexpected chunk number 0 (expected 1) for toast value nnnn
While researching this, I found that the terminology in this code is
quite inconsistent. It talks about chunks ids, chunk indexes, chunk
numbers, etc. seemingly interchangeably. The above error is actually
about the chunk_seq, not about the chunk_id, as one might think.
The attached patch is my attempt to clean this up a bit. Thoughts?
While I agree that we should clean it up, I wonder if changing error text would be a good idea. These errors are being reported by a very long time and if we change the text, we might forget the knowledge about the past reports.
Also, "toast value" is same as "chunk_id". Should we clean up something there too? "chunk_seq number" -- should that be just "chunk_seq"?
Thanks,
Pavan
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: