Re: Bug in amcheck?
| От | Mihail Nikalayeu | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Bug in amcheck? | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CADzfLwU+8dMq4EQ3kRuDCv2giS+_AUX5Q4LYO6x5PKghdAfK6A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Bug in amcheck? (Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik@garret.ru>) | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
Hello! > I wonder if we should add P_ISHALFDEAD(opaque) for child page? I am not a btree expert, but things I was able to find so far: In commit d114cc538715e14d29d6de8b6ea1a1d5d3e0edb4 next check is added: > bt_child_highkey_check(state, downlinkoffnum, > child, topaque->btpo_level); At the same time there is a comment below: > * We go ahead with our checks if the child page is half-dead. It's safe > * to do so because we do not test the child's high key, so it does not > * matter that the original high key will have been replaced by a dummy > * truncated high key within _bt_mark_page_halfdead(). All other page > * items are left intact on a half-dead page, so there is still something > * to test. So, yes, it looks like we need to skip the child's high key test for half-dead pages. BWT, have you tried to create an injection_point-based reproducer? Best regards, Mikhail.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: