Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: WIP checksums patch

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP checksums patch
Date: 2012-10-01 17:14:18
Message-ID: CA+U5nMKiK=cBNMp=hHLze8kPvaygTswjnHv4TS-3tReOSxJSkQ@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

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

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