| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Block-level CRC checks |
| Date: | 2008-10-17 19:13:19 |
| Message-ID: | 1224270799.3808.432.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 13:59 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > It might be possible to have a partial solution where some blocks have
> > CRC checks, some not.
>
> That's another idea but it reduces the effectiveness of the check.
If you put in a GUC to control the check, block by block. 0 = check
every time, with full impact. Other values delay the use of CRC checks.
Kind of like freezing parameters. Let people choose.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-17 19:21:08 | Re: Incorrect cursor behaviour with gist index |
| Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2008-10-17 18:33:20 | Incorrect cursor behaviour with gist index |