Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums
Date: 2019-03-13 10:10:21
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 10:44:03AM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Yep. That is the issue I think is preventable by fsyncing updated data
> *then* writing & syncing the control file, and that should be done by
> pg_checksums.

Well, pg_rewind works similarly: control file gets updated and then
the whole data directory gets flushed. In my opinion, the take here
is that we log something after the sync of the whole data folder is
done, so as in the event of a crash an operator can make sure that
everything has happened.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Imai, Yoshikazu 2019-03-13 10:34:50 RE: speeding up planning with partitions
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2019-03-13 10:09:35 Re: Compressed TOAST Slicing