On Sun, Sep 13, 2026 at 8:21 PM Noah Misch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2026 at 03:10:58PM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 12, 2026 at 11:05 PM Noah Misch <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 06:22:22PM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > > > 0002 is patch for FSM readme to highlight this aspect
> > > >
> > > > I'm going to push (and backpatch) 0001.  0002 needs review.
> > >
> > > > Subject: [PATCH v1 2/2] Say in the FSM README why its hint writes still 
> > > > need
> > > >  full page images
> > >
> > > > +That RBM_ZERO_ON_ERROR is a property of this directory, not of the FSM 
> > > > fork
> > > > +itself.  The files themselves are ordinary relation files, and plenty 
> > > > of code
> > > > +outside freespace.c reads them and does verify checksums:
> > > > +RelationCopyStorage(), which ALTER TABLE ... SET TABLESPACE runs over 
> > > > every
> > > > +fork; the read stream in RelationCopyStorageUsingBuffer(), used by
> > > > +CREATE DATABASE ... STRATEGY = wal_log; and the checksum verification 
> > > > in base
> > > > +backups and in pg_checksums. The last two are the reason this cannot 
> > > > simply be
> > > > +relaxed: an external verification tool has no way to tell a tear that 
> > > > we
> > > > +consider harmless from one caused by failing storage, so making it 
> > > > accept
> > > > +the former blinds it to the latter.
> > >
> > > One could relax the "last two" by having those tools skip checksum
> > > verification for *_fsm files, so let's not claim it's infeasible.  It's 
> > > true
> > > that this could miss failing-storage evidence that coincidentally landed 
> > > in
> > > FSM, but accepting that could be the right thing someday.  Other than 
> > > that, I
> > > agree with this README change.  Thanks.
> >
> > I've corrected that paragraph.  I'm going to push this to master if no
> > objections.
>
> > +That RBM_ZERO_ON_ERROR is a property of this directory, not of the FSM fork
> > +itself.  The files themselves are ordinary relation files, and plenty of 
> > code
> > +outside freespace.c reads them and does verify checksums:
> > +RelationCopyStorage(), which ALTER TABLE ... SET TABLESPACE runs over every
> > +fork; the read stream in RelationCopyStorageUsingBuffer(), used by
> > +CREATE DATABASE ... STRATEGY = wal_log; and the checksum verification in 
> > base
> > +backups and in pg_checksums.  The last two could instead be taught to skip
> > +*_fsm files, and that may be the right call someday.  The cost would be 
> > that
> > +a tool told to ignore a tear in the FSM can no longer report one caused by
> > +failing storage.  Today they do verify, so what we write here has to be
> > +valid.
>
> I'd handle the last sentences differently, yielding a paragraph like this:
>
> That RBM_ZERO_ON_ERROR is a property of this directory, not of the FSM fork
> itself.  The files themselves are ordinary relation files, and plenty of code
> outside freespace.c reads them and does verify checksums:
> RelationCopyStorage(), which ALTER TABLE ... SET TABLESPACE runs over every
> fork; the read stream in RelationCopyStorageUsingBuffer(), used by CREATE
> DATABASE ... STRATEGY = wal_log; and the checksum verification in base backups
> and in pg_checksums.  The alternative would be all such code skipping checksum
> validation of *_fsm files, and that may be the right call someday.  Today they
> do verify, so what we write here has to be valid.

Pushed to master with your corrections.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase


Reply via email to