| From: | jesper(at)krogh(dot)cc |
|---|---|
| To: | "Florian Weimer" <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "Robert Treat" <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>, "Jim Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Aidan Van Dyk" <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Greg Smith" <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Koichi Suzuki" <koichi(dot)szk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Page Checksums |
| Date: | 2012-01-24 08:02:28 |
| Message-ID: | 82bd4877b93409c92a906a1d75578ac5.squirrel@shrek.krogh.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> * Robert Treat:
>
>> Would it be unfair to assert that people who want checksums but aren't
>> willing to pay the cost of running a filesystem that provides
>> checksums aren't going to be willing to make the cost/benefit trade
>> off that will be asked for? Yes, it is unfair of course, but it's
>> interesting how small the camp of those using checksummed filesystems
>> is.
>
> Don't checksumming file systems currently come bundled with other
> features you might not want (such as certain vendors)?
I would chip in and say that I would prefer sticking to well-known proved
filesystems like xfs/ext4 and let the application do the checksumming.
I dont forsee fully production-ready checksumming filesystems readily
available in the standard Linux distributions within a near future.
And yes, I would for sure turn such functionality on if it were present.
--
Jesper
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Weimer | 2012-01-24 08:16:46 | Re: Page Checksums |
| Previous Message | Florian Weimer | 2012-01-24 07:57:21 | Re: Page Checksums |