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: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Paul Schlie" <schlie(at)comcast(dot)net>, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "Brian Hurt" <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Date: 2008-10-01 20:10:35
Message-ID: 36e682920810011310m6fcfac0m7df1451d63a17c30@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Paul Schlie <schlie(at)comcast(dot)net> writes:
>> - however regardless, if some form of error detection ends up being
>> implemented, it might be nice to actually log corrupted blocks of data
>> along with their previously computed checksums for subsequent analysis
>> in an effort to ascertain if there's an opportunity to improve its
>> implementation based on this more concrete real-world information.
>
> This feature is getting overdesigned, I think.  It's already the case
> that we log an error complaining that thus-and-such a page is corrupt.
> Once PG has decided that it won't have anything to do with the page at
> all --- it can't load it into shared buffers, so it won't write it
> either.  So the user can go inspect the page at leisure with whatever
> tools seem handy.  I don't see a need for more verbose logging.

Agreed!

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

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-01 20:16:13
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-01 20:06:16
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

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