On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 1:20 PM Mark Dilger <mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Ok, I went with this suggestion, and also your earlier suggestion to have a > <warning> in the pg_amcheck docs about using --parent-check and/or > --rootdescend against servers in recovery.
My concern with --parent-check (and with --rootdescend) had little to do with Hot Standby. I suggested using a warning because these options alone can pretty much cause bedlam on a production database. At least if they're used carelessly. Again, bt_index_parent_check()'s relation level locks will block all DML, as well as VACUUM. That isn't the case with any of the other pg_amcheck options, including those that call bt_index_check(), and including the heapam verification functionality. It's also true that --parent-check won't work in Hot Standby mode, of course. So it couldn't hurt to mention that in passing, at the same point. But that's a secondary point, at best. We don't need to use a warning box because of that. Overall, your approach looks good to me. Will Robert take care of committing this, or should I? -- Peter Geoghegan
