Re: [HACKERS] Undetected corruption of table files

From: "Trevor Talbot" <quension(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Albe Laurenz" <all(at)adv(dot)magwien(dot)gv(dot)at>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Undetected corruption of table files
Date: 2007-08-27 15:48:19
Message-ID: 90bce5730708270848p3d8ae18y56325c5a269c0566@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On 8/27/07, Jonah H. Harris <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 8/27/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > that and the lack of evidence that they'd actually gain anything
>
> I find it somewhat ironic that PostgreSQL strives to be fairly
> non-corruptable, yet has no way to detect a corrupted page. The only
> reason for not having CRCs is because it will slow down performance...
> which is exactly opposite of conventional PostgreSQL wisdom (no
> performance trade-off for durability).

But how does detecting a corrupted data page gain you any durability?
All it means is that the platform underneath screwed up, and you've
already *lost* durability. What do you do then?

It seems like the same idea as an application trying to detect RAM errors.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-08-27 15:50:06 Re: Undetected corruption of table files
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-08-27 15:40:18 Re: [ANNOUNCE] == PostgreSQL Weekly News - August 26 2007 ==

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-08-27 15:48:55 Re: [WIP PATCH] Lazily assign xids for toplevel Transactions
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-08-27 15:30:38 Re: Problem with recent permission changes commits