On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 08:17:12PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote: >> Please see 0002 attached, which moves the call to skipfile() where I >> think it should go. > > Alright, on a quick glance that seems ok.
Thanks. >> Base backups are impacted as well as this causes spurious warnings. > > Right- could you please also add comments around the two lists to make > other hackers aware that the list shows up in two places and that any > changes should be made in both places..? Good point. Added in my local branch. >> Attached are two patches to fix all the mess: >> - 0001 is a revert of the whitelist, minus the set of regression tests >> checking after corrupted files and empty files. >> - 0002 is a fix for all the issues reported on this thread, with tests >> added (including the tablespace test from Michael Banck): >> -- Base backups gain EXEC_BACKEND files in their warning filters. >> -- pg_verify_checksums gains the same files. >> -- temporary files are filtered out. >> -- pg_verify_checksums performs filtering checks only on regular files, >> not on paths. >> >> 0001 and 0002 need to be merged as 0001 would cause the buildfarm to >> turn red on Windows if applied alone. Can you know see my point? > > Yes, I think they could be merged to address that, though I'm not sure > that it's necessairly a huge deal either, if they're going to be pushed > together. This avoids noise failures when bisecting a regression, which matters in some cases. To keep the history cleaner perhaps you are right and it would be cleaner to split into two commits. Let's wait a bit and see if others have extra opinions to offer. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
