On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 05:16:51PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 27.08.24 15:44, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:46 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com >> <mailto:nathandboss...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Should we error if both --data-checksum and --no-data-checksums are >> specified? IIUC with 0001, we'll use whichever is specified last. >> >> >> Hmmm, that is a good question. We have never (to my recollection) >> flipped a default quite like this before. I'm inclined to leave it as >> "last one wins", as I can see automated systems appending their desired >> selection to the end of the arg list, and expecting it to work. > > Yes, last option wins is the normal expected behavior.
WFM 001_verify_heapam fails with this patch set. I think you may need to use --no-data-checksums in that test, too. Otherwise, it looks pretty good to me. -- nathan
