Re: Checksums by default?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Ants Aasma <ants(dot)aasma(at)eesti(dot)ee>
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 19:20:02
Message-ID: 20170121192001.GT18360@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Ants Aasma (ants(dot)aasma(at)eesti(dot)ee) wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Petr Jelinek
> <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > So in summary "postgresql.conf options are easy to change" while "initdb
> > options are hard to change", I can see this argument used both for
> > enabling or disabling checksums by default. As I said I would be less
> > worried if it was easy to turn off, but we are not there afaik. And even
> > then I'd still want benchmark first.
>
> Adding support for disabling checksums is almost trivial as it only
> requires flipping a value in the control file. And I have somewhere
> sitting around a similarly simple tool for turning on checksums while
> the database is offline. FWIW, based on customers and fellow
> conference goers I have talked to most would gladly take the
> performance hit, but not the downtime to turn it on on an existing
> database.

I've had the same reaction from folks I've talked to, unless it was the
cases where they were just floored that we didn't have them enabled by
default and now they felt the need to go get them enabled on all their
systems...

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Bowen 2017-01-21 20:03:21 Re: Failure in commit_ts tap tests
Previous Message Ants Aasma 2017-01-21 19:16:16 Re: Checksums by default?