| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Zdenek Kotala" <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)sun(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Block-level CRC checks |
| Date: | 2008-10-30 15:27:07 |
| Message-ID: | 15357.1225380427@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Jonah H. Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Well, yeah, but it has to be able to tell which version it's dealing
>> with. I quite agree with Zdenek that keeping the version indicator
>> in a fixed location is appropriate.
> Most of the other databases I've worked, which don't have different
> types of pages, put the page version as the first element of the page.
> That would let us put the crc right after it. Thoughts?
"Fixed location" does not mean "let's move it".
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2008-10-30 15:30:15 | Re: Block-level CRC checks |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-10-30 15:22:57 | Re: Block-level CRC checks |