From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Subject: | Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums |
Date: | 2019-02-03 10:21:09 |
Message-ID: | 20190203102109.bnddmgz4axzufipt@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2019-01-09 07:07:17 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> There is still no documentation.
Michael, are you planning to address this? It'd also be useful to state
when you just don't agree with things / don't plan to address them.
Given the docs piece hasn't been addressed, and seems uncontroversial,
I'm marking this patch as returned with feedback. Please resubmit once
ready.
> > > Also, the full page is rewritten... would it make sense to only overwrite
> > > the checksum part itself?
> >
> > So just writing the page header? I find that a bit scary and don't
> > expect much speedup as the OS would write the whole block anyway I
> > guess? I haven't touched that yet.
>
> Possibly the OS would write its block size, which is not necessary the same
> as postgres page size?
I think it'd be a bad idea to write more granular. Very commonly that'll
turn a write operation into a read-modify-write (although caching will
often prevent that from being a problem here), and it'll be bad for
flash translation layers.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Surafel Temesgen | 2019-02-03 10:21:45 | Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-02-03 10:14:39 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |