On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:07:52PM +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote: > > > 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"?
We can put a comment next to the error message C string if we want to keep historical knowledge. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
