On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 06:22:58AM +0000, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote: > Thanks for pointing out. Yes, we fixed a behavior by the commit aa5edbe37, > but we missed the redo case. I made a fix patch based on the suggestion [1].
+ bool mod_buf = false; Perhaps you could name that mod_wbuf, to be consistent with the WAL insert path. I'm slightly annoyed by the fact that there is no check on is_prim_bucket_same_wrt for buffer 1 in the BLK_NEEDS_REDO case to show the symmetry between the insert and replay paths. Shouldn't there be at least an assert for that in the branch when there are no tuples (imagine an else to cover xldata->ntups == 0)? I mean between just before updating the hash page's opaque area when is_prev_bucket_same_wrt. I've been thinking about ways to make such cases detectable in an automated fashion. The best choice would be verifyBackupPageConsistency(), just after RestoreBlockImage() on the copy of the block image stored in WAL before applying the page masking which would mask the LSN. A problem, unfortunately, is that we would need to transfer the knowledge of REGBUF_NO_CHANGE as a new BKPIMAGE_* flag so we would be able to track if the block rebuilt from the record has the *same* LSN as the copy used for the consistency check. So this edge consistency case would come at a cost, I am afraid, and the 8 bits of bimg_info are precious :/ -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
