On Fri, 2022-11-11 at 12:43 +0200, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> Yes, you are right: my original concerns that it may cause problems
> with
> recovery at replica are not correct.
Great, thank you for following up.
> I also not sure that it can cause problems with checksums - page is
> marked as
On 11.11.2022 03:20, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Thu, 2022-10-13 at 12:49 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
It may violate our torn page protections for checksums, as well...
I could not reproduce a problem here, but I believe one exists when
checksums are enabled, because it bypasses the protections of
Updat
On Thu, 2022-10-13 at 12:49 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> It may violate our torn page protections for checksums, as well...
I could not reproduce a problem here, but I believe one exists when
checksums are enabled, because it bypasses the protections of
UpdateMinRecoveryPoint(). By not updating the
On Thu, 2022-10-13 at 12:50 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> /*
> * We don't bump the LSN of the heap page when setting the
> visibility
> * map bit (unless checksums or wal_hint_bits is enabled, in
> which
> * case we must), because that would generate an
