Subject: Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>,
 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>,
 Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>,
 PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
References: <17212-34dd4a1d6bba98bf@postgresql.org>
 <CAH2-WzkwRUayddmb3uxCadV_y--DHfY+UMmjtOokiAO2xNh5fA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmoat1M4MAqUQM1H+bkWR=wXmi33bB0YRR=xaFk9ADs5Jeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-Wzk3NzXYXsUKWBFuBm6aiXTh-_L2Dm9wPqfFenUvG+VbRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <543F3BF3-EDED-4C52-AF05-623921B6C409@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-WzkXphRHgbaUXqMgb7SBmc_VbwdyWGYqphV6KbOH7stfxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <55A2BFE7-AAAF-4A64-BD3A-5C98EA982267@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-WzniogVqNuWzNVLOKjkd8FBcSry29hN9=wiROUPw92fmGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <07159C9A-40DA-47BF-B2F4-! 203F5AC00890@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-Wzkt-umhXfR1nqy=ZDXMfoN3LDK4W5VtchfWyRAuPWxtnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <40DB088B-C96F-49B2-BC84-BDC8D35C7E97@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-Wzne7L9fX2LdZ9enNZpO2wuqbrsubCw2thH__CC_nZazjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0B7DA7A4-2872-485B-BFDD-BF8E9BB07B26@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAH2-Wz=YnyANaKQDfx9pg0YNPS-LY66CXQrUzED4Rgm
 <726473.1634184950@sss.pgh.pa.us> <b5ec84db-c5af-bfac-fe4!
 f-a704a364f90b@dunslane.net> <903461.1634245763@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Message-ID: <afb18939-3a80-e4a8-7204-404df363fdf1@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 17:40:21 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <903461.1634245763@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/afb18939-3a80-e4a8-7204-404df363fdf1%40dunslane.net>
Precedence: bulk


On 10/14/21 5:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> On 10/14/21 12:15 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Looks like a transient/phase of the moon issue to me.
>> Bowerbird is having similar issues, so I don't think this is just a
>> transient.
> Yeah, I noticed that too today, and poked around a bit.  But I don't
> see what this test is doing differently from other tests that
> bowerbird is running successfully.  It's failing while trying to crank
> up a replica using init_from_backup, which has lots of precedent.


Yes, that's been puzzling me too. I've just been staring at it again and
nothing jumps out. But maybe we can investigate that offline if this
test is deemed not worth keeping.


cheers


andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com