On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:15 AM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote: > On 12/15/17 5:31 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> Commit d70cf811, from 2014, promoted an Assert() within >> IndexBuildHeapScan() to a "can't happen" elog() error, in order to >> detect when a parent tuple cannot be found for some heap-only tuple -- >> if this happens, then it indicates corruption. I think that we should >> make it a full ereport(), with an errcode of ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTION, >> to match what Andres just added to code that deals with freezing (he >> promoted Assert()s to errors, just like the 2014 commit, though he >> went as far as making them ereport()s to begin with). Attached patch >> does this. >> >> I propose a backpatch to 9.3, partially for the sake of tools like >> amcheck, where users may only be on the lookout for >> ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTION and ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED. > > This patch applies, passes testing, and appears very straight-forward to > me. Are there any tests for these conditions currently, or are you only > doing that in amcheck?
The enhanced amcheck in the current CF only tests these conditions indirectly, by pretending to be a CREATE INDEX statement. It matters to amcheck because these conditions are pretty plausible symptoms of corruption, and I can imagine someone missing them because they are not either ERRCODE_DATA_CORRUPTION or ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED. If amcheck didn't exist, then I'd still think that this patch was worthwhile. -- Peter Geoghegan
