On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 8:35 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2020-11-02 12:35:30 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > It feels really confusing to me that the user-exposed function here is > > called pg_relation_check_pages(). How is the user supposed to > > understand the difference between what this function does and what the > > new verify_heapam() in amcheck does? The answer is that the latter > > does far more extensive checks, but this isn't obvious from the SGML > > documentation, which says only that the blocks are "verified," as if > > an end-user can reasonably be expected to know what that means. It > > seems likely to lead users to the belief that if this function passes, > > they are in good shape, which is extremely far from being true. Just > > look at what PageIsVerified() checks compared to what verify_heapam() > > checks. > > Yea I had similar thoughts, it should just be called > pg_checksum_verify_relation() or something. >
+1. > > In fact, I would argue that this functionality ought to live in > > amcheck rather than core, though there could usefully be enabling > > functions in core. > > I'm not really convinced by this though. It's not really AM > specific - works for all types of relations with storage; don't really > object either... Yeah, I'm not sure about that one either. Also what would happen if/when we get checksums on things that aren't even relations? (though maybe that goes for other parts of amcheck at some point as well?) -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/
