On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Michael Banck <michael.ba...@credativ.de> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 08:33:43PM +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 10:28:33 +0200 > > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: > > > > On 27 Aug 2018, at 14:05, Yugo Nagata <nag...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 13:34:12 +0200 > > > > Michael Banck <michael.ba...@credativ.de> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 07:53:36PM +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote: > > > >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 18:01:09 +0200 > > > >>> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > >>>> I'm curious about this option: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -r RELFILENODE check only relation with specified > relfilenode > > > >>>> > > > >>>> but there is no facility to specify a database. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Also, referring to the relfilenode of a mapped relation seems a > bit > > > >>>> inaccurate. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Maybe reframing this in terms of the file name of the file you > want > > > >>>> checked would be better? > > > >>> > > > >>> If we specified 1234 to -r option, pg_verify_shceksums checks not > only 1234 > > > >>> but also 1234_vm, 1234_fsm, and 1234.1, 1234.2, ... and so on, so > I think > > > >>> it makes senses to allow to specify a relfilenode instead of a > file name. > > > >>> > > > >>> I think it is reasonable to add a option to specify a database, > although > > > >>> I don't know which character is good because both -d and -D are > already used.... > > > >> > > > >> Maybe the -d (debug) option should be revisited as well. Mentioning > > > >> every scanned block generates a huge amount of output which might be > > > >> useful during development but does not seem very useful for a stable > > > >> release. AFAICT there is no other debug output for now. > > > >> > > > >> So it could be renamed to -v (verbose) and only mention each scanned > > > >> file, e.g. (errors/checksum mismatches are still reported of > course). > > I still think this should be changed as well, i.e. -v should not report > every block scanned, as that really is debug output and IMO not useful > in general? AFAICT your page does not change the output at all, just > renames the option. > > I agree with this (though it's my fault initially :P). Per-page output is going to be useless in pretty much all production cases. It makes sense to also change it to be per-file. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
