pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Cc: Victor Yegorov <vyegorov@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Reviewing freeze map code
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 18:25:39 -0400
Message-ID: <15044.1463610339@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <573CCB9C.50705@agliodbs.com>
References: <20160517193208.GA169606@alvherre.pgsql>
	<573B8E6E.1070909@2ndquadrant.fr>
	<142e516d-2b66-1859-6733-aabd6ab9a272@archidevsys.co.nz>
	<CA+TgmoaHKPYYdX=K8s5nRDtfJaCMYCZSEwtunsWSv1WQ-LJxSA@mail.gmail.com>
	<648c400e-ff35-3f95-69cb-4a83f0158e7f@pgmasters.net>
	<CA+TgmobZNDJGvKOM=qLzXqwZUdqowPKvG3gcp5WAMiypezOhig@mail.gmail.com>
	<573C714D.2060505@commandprompt.com>
	<CA+TgmoYE6wCKpoxnoJfqizpi-zTYHvjgN0YWR-hPzbZDWR_m6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGnEboiRvMQeyHW4RqtY8Lb4vVTT6hKg_eCEnM=J+yXm3sETVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<573C77AF.8030201@joeconway.com>
	<CAMkU=1ygHztvjr-hS3RRLyYmEdZkTDrwf5Cjch4xa5HLcpZRDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM3SWZQqqrA+EGaandmr9bOHM1-pcuDs3Ey5HDLCFc0C_4DCYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<WM!c3a6cf0190f9c5d6f5a9a6310a38bac5c64c41d23fe8f04f9856771643267f4ec3291c98a2074de25420aae13297044e!@asav-3.01.com>
	<573CCB9C.50705@agliodbs.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> Maybe this is the wrong perspective.  I mean, is there a reason we even
> need this option, other than a lack of any other way to do a full table
> scan to check for corruption, etc.?  If we're only doing this for
> integrity checking, then maybe it's better if it becomes a function,
> which could be later extended with additional forensic features?

Yes, I've been wondering that too.  VACUUM is not meant as a corruption
checker, and should not be made into one, so what is the point of this
flag exactly?

(AFAIK, "select count(*) from table" would offer a similar amount of
sanity checking as a full-table VACUUM scan does, so it's not like
we've removed functionality with no near-term replacement.)

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (256+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <15044.1463610339@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../15044.1463610339@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/15044.1463610339@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, josh@agliodbs.com, pg@heroku.com, jeff.janes@gmail.com, mail@joeconway.com, vyegorov@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: Reviewing freeze map code
  In-Reply-To: <15044.1463610339@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox