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: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Brian Hurt" <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks
Date: 2008-10-02 14:48:32
Message-ID: 36e682920810020748k93993bm5d7da9dbc923e08@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Not checksumming the hint bits *is* a solution to the torn page problem.
>
> Yeah, but it has enough drawbacks that I'd like to keep looking for
> alternatives.

Agreed.

> One argument that I've not seen raised is that not checksumming the hint
> bits leaves you open to a single-bit error that incorrectly sets a hint
> bit.

Agreed.

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

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-10-02 15:10:23
Subject: Re: Transactions within a function body
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-10-02 14:47:33
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks

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