| From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Florian Weimer" <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] wal_checksum = on (default) | off |
| Date: | 2007-01-04 17:05:04 |
| Message-ID: | 1167930304.20749.186.camel@silverbirch.site |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 17:58 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Simon Riggs:
>
> >> Surely not. Otherwise even the "on" setting is not really a defense.
> >
> > Only when the CRC is exactly zero, which happens very very rarely.
>
> Have you tried switching to Adler32 instead of CRC32?
No. Please explain further.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-04 17:07:03 | Re: [HACKERS] wal_checksum = on (default) | off |
| Previous Message | Florian Weimer | 2007-01-04 16:58:51 | Re: [HACKERS] wal_checksum = on (default) | off |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-04 17:07:03 | Re: [HACKERS] wal_checksum = on (default) | off |
| Previous Message | Florian Weimer | 2007-01-04 16:58:51 | Re: [HACKERS] wal_checksum = on (default) | off |