At Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:28:04 +0900, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote
in
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 01:07:36PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > If we also verify checksum in md layer, callback is overkill since the
> > immediate caller consumes the event immediately. We can signal the
> > error by somehow returning a file tag.
>
> FWIW, I am wondering if there is any need for a change here and
> complicate more the code. If you know the block number, the page size
> and the segment file size you can immediately guess where is the
> damaged block. The first information is already part of the error
I have had support requests related to broken block several times, and
(I think) most of *them* had hard time to locate the broken block or
even broken file. I don't think it is useles at all, but I'm not sure
it is worth the additional complexity.
> damaged block. The first information is already part of the error
> message, and the two other ones are constants defined at
> compile-time.
May you have misread the snippet?
What Hubert proposed is:
"invalid page in block %u of relation file %s; zeroing out page",
blkno, <filename>
The second format in my messages just before is:
"invalid page in block %u in relation %u, file \"%s\"",
blockNum, smgr->smgr_rnode.node.relNode, smgrfname()
All of them are not compile-time constant at all.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
