Re: [PATCH] Verify Checksums during Basebackups
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Verify Checksums during Basebackups |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEwhFsgmMgniANyC+zXWdH1BC4HoxnotPhS0BRRu+NCsBA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Verify Checksums during Basebackups (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Verify Checksums during Basebackups
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> Seems the tests are failing on prairiedog:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl? nm=prairiedog&dt=2018-04-03% 2012%3A15%3A27&stg=pg_ basebackup-check
> I don't have time to dive in right now, but that seems interesting -- it's
> reporting the failures, but it's then reporting the total number of
> failures as 0...
> Note that prairedog is a PowerPC machine -- I bet that has something to do
> with it.
endianness issue? I can look closer if you can point me to where to look.
I think the problem comes from:
That one actually logs a zero in the text. Which should not possibly ever pr5int "0 total checksum verification failures".
if (total_checksum_failures > 1)
ereport(WARNING,
(errmsg("%ld total checksum verification failures", total_checksum_failures)));
Unless.. %ld is the wrong thing to print:
static int64 total_checksum_failures;
We should perhaps be using something other than %ld to print that?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: