| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Checksums by default? |
| Date: | 2017-01-21 16:57:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20170121165753.jjjozqx6k7ut26sa@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-01-22 00:41:55 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:18 AM, Petr Jelinek
> <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 21/01/17 11:39, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> Is it time to enable checksums by default, and give initdb a switch to
> >> turn it off instead?
> >
> > I'd like to see benchmark first, both in terms of CPU and in terms of
> > produced WAL (=network traffic) given that it turns on logging of hint bits.
>
> +1
>
> If the performance overhead by the checksums is really negligible,
> we may be able to get rid of wal_log_hints parameter, as well.
It's not just the performance overhead, but also the volume of WAL due
to the additional FPIs...
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2017-01-21 16:58:25 | Re: Checksums by default? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-01-21 16:57:10 | Re: Checksums by default? |