Re: amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool)
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZRyovWOMkpP3SMyNBAi8ksfW61VqjpJDyhw8Mi66xhXHw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool) (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> Dunno about that. It's defining characteristic is that it checks child >> pages against their parent IMV. Things are not often defined in terms >> of their locking requirements. > > At the risk of sounding a bit verbose, do bt_check_level() for a check > that inspects a level at a time and bt_check_multi_level() for a check > that spans levels sound descriptive? Hmm. But all functions verify multiple levels. What distinguishes bt_index_parent_check()'s verification is that the downlinks in internal pages are checked against actual child pages (every item in the child page, in fact). It's the parent/child relationship that is verified in addition to the standard checks of every page on and across (not between) every level. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: