Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>> it's certainly not what I thought we had agreed to implement.
> Hmm, strange. I thought that we had agreed upon a 32 bit CRC
> on the grounds, that it would be strong enough to guard a single
> log record.
I thought that, and still think it, but I was outvoted. However I
see no value in the present actual implementation ...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2001-03-01 17:24:21|
|Subject: WAL's single point of failure: latest CHECKPOINT record|
|Previous:||From: Olivier PRENANT||Date: 2001-03-01 12:00:57|
|Subject: Re: Re: int8 beta5 broken? |