On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:53 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 4/10/18 06:29, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > One of our 2ndQuadrant support customers recently reported a sudden rush > > of TOAST errors post a crash recovery, nearly causing an outage. Most > > errors read like this: > > > > ERROR: unexpected chunk number 0 (expected 1) for toast value nnnn > > While researching this, I found that the terminology in this code is > quite inconsistent. It talks about chunks ids, chunk indexes, chunk > numbers, etc. seemingly interchangeably. The above error is actually > about the chunk_seq, not about the chunk_id, as one might think. > > The attached patch is my attempt to clean this up a bit. Thoughts? > While I agree that we should clean it up, I wonder if changing error text would be a good idea. These errors are being reported by a very long time and if we change the text, we might forget the knowledge about the past reports. Also, "toast value" is same as "chunk_id". Should we clean up something there too? "chunk_seq number" -- should that be just "chunk_seq"? Thanks, Pavan -- Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
