Clarify pg_verify_checksum documentation
Make it clear that a cluster has to be shut down cleanly before
pg_verify_checksum can be run against it.
Author: Michael Paquier
Review: Daniel Gustafsson
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/645387927f83d31b8f12
Remove -f option from pg_verify_checksums
This option makes no sense when the cluster checksum state cannot be
changed, and should have been removed in the revert.
Author: Daniel Gustafsson
Review: Michael Paquier
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/44e
Fix build of pg_verify_checksum docs
They were accidentally excluded when reverting the backend online
checksum functionality, and since they weren't built the incorrect
reference to a removed section also did not trigger a problem.
Author: Christoph Berg
Branch
--
master
Details
---
ht
Don't attempt to verify checksums on new pages
Teach both base backups and pg_verify_checksums that if a page is new,
it does not have a checksum yet, so it shouldn't be verified.
Noted by Tomas Vondra, review by David Steele.
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/c
Clean up callers of JsonbIteratorNext().
Coverity complained about the lack of a check on the return value in
parse_jsonb_index_flags' last call of JsonbIteratorNext. Seems like
a reasonable gripe to me, especially since the code is depending on
that being WJB_DONE to not leak memory, so add a ch
Fix potentially-unportable code in contrib/adminpack.
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsist
Fix potentially-unportable code in contrib/adminpack.
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsist
Fix potentially-unportable code in contrib/adminpack.
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsist
Fix potentially-unportable code in contrib/adminpack.
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsist
Fix potentially-unportable code in contrib/adminpack.
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsist
Fix potentially-unportable code in contrib/adminpack.
Spelling access(2)'s second argument as "2" is just horrid.
POSIX makes no promises as to the numeric values of W_OK and related
macros. Even if it accidentally works as intended on every supported
platform, it's still unreadable and inconsist
Add temporary debugging assertion, in 9.4 branch only.
Buildfarm member okapi has been failing the multiple-cic isolation
test for months now, but only in 9.4. To narrow down the possible
causes, add an Assert testing that CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY is
advertising zero xmin before waiting for othe
12 matches
Mail list logo
