Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Block-level CRC checks

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com, "Hannu Krosing" <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Date: 2008-10-01 15:58:42
Message-ID: 36e682920810010858t382bed15n3f7247710c6dcef@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Tom Lane escribió:
>> No, not at all.  Block-level checksums would be an order of magnitude
>> more expensive: they're on bigger chunks of data and they'd be done more
>> often.
>
> More often?  My intention is that they are checked when the buffer is
> read in, and calculated/stored when the buffer is written out.
> In-memory changers of the block do not check nor recalculate the sum.
>
> Is this not OK?

That is the way it should work, only on read-in/write-out.


-- 
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Paul SchlieDate: 2008-10-01 16:02:35
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2008-10-01 15:57:50
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group