On 1 October 2012 18:04, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 12:35 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> The heap/index files are copied unmodified from the old cluster, so
>> there are no checksums on the pages.
>
> That's fine though, the patch still reads the old format the same way,
> and the pages are treated as though they have no checksum.

> How is that a
> reason for defaulting the GUC to off?

It's not.

> Are we worried about users who turn the GUC
> on and then expect all of their old data pages to magically be
> protected?

Yes, but as you say, that is a separate consideration.

You are missing large parts of the previous thread, giving various
opinions on what the UI should look like for enabling checksums.

-- 
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

• Re: WIP checksums patch at 2012-10-01 17:04:09 from Jeff Davis

Responses

• Re: WIP checksums patch at 2012-10-01 17:40:46 from Jeff Davis

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2012-10-01 17:14:33
	Subject: Re: WIP checksums patch
Previous:	From: Jeff Davis	Date: 2012-10-01 17:13:49
	Subject: Re: WIP checksums patch