Simon Riggs wrote: > There is no "creation" of corruption events. This scheme detects > corruption events that *have* occurred. Now I understand that we > previously would have recovered seamlessly from such events, but they > were corruption events nonetheless and I think they need to be reported. > (For why, see Conclusion #2, below).
No, you're still missing the point. The point is *not* random bit errors affecting hint bits, but the torn page problem. Today, a torn page is a completely valid and expected behavior from the OS and storage subsystem. We handle it with full_page_writes, and by relying on the fact that it's OK for a hint bit set to get lost. With your scheme, a torn page would become a corrupt page. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
