| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Online enabling of checksums |
| Date: | 2018-07-31 21:28:41 |
| Message-ID: | 10857.1533072521@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2018-07-31 23:20:27 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Not really arguing for or against, but just to understand the reasoning before
>> starting hacking. Why do we feel that a restart (intended for safety here) in
>> this case is a burden on a use-once process? Is it from a usability or
>> technical point of view? Just want to make sure we are on the same page before
>> digging in to not hack on this patch in a direction which isn’t what is
>> requested.
> Having, at some arbitrary seeming point in the middle of enabling
> checksums to restart the server makes it harder to use and to schedule.
> The restart is only needed to fix a relatively small issue, and doesn't
> save that much code.
Without taking a position on the merits ... I don't see how you can
claim "it doesn't save that much code" when we don't have a patch to
compare to that doesn't require the restart. Maybe it will turn out
not to be much code, but we don't know that now.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-07-31 21:30:27 | Re: [HACKERS] Cached plans and statement generalization |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-07-31 21:25:18 | Re: Alter index rename concurrently to |