Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com, david(at)fetter(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes
Date: 2011-12-28 00:06:19
Message-ID: 1325030779.11655.17.camel@jdavis
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2011-12-27 at 16:43 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> > 3. Attack hint bits problem.
>
> A large number of problems would go away if the current hint bit
> system could be replaced with something that did not require writing
> to the tuple itself.

My point was that neither the zero page problem nor the upgrade problem
are solved by addressing the hint bits problem. They can be solved
independently, and in my opinion, it seems to make sense to solve those
problems before the hint bits problem (in the context of detecting
hardware corruption).

Of course, don't let that stop you from trying to get rid of hint bits,
that has numerous potential benefits.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Crawford 2011-12-28 01:51:06 pgstat wait timeout
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2011-12-27 23:39:48 Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2