Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums
Date: 2019-03-14 00:23:42
Message-ID: 20190314002342.GC3493@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 12:24:21PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Enabling or disabling the checksums offline on the master quite clearly
> requires a rebuild of the standby, there is no other way (this is one of
> the reasons for the online enabling in that patch, so I still hope we can
> get that done -- but not for this version).

I am curious to understand why this would require a rebuild of the
standby. Technically FPWs don't update the checksum of a page when it
is WAL-logged, so even if a primary and a standby don't agree on the
checksum configuration, it is the timing where pages are flushed in
the local instance which counts for checksum correctness.

> You mean if the backend and pg_checksums is built with different blocksize?
> Yeah, that sounds like something which is a cheap check and should be done.

Yes, we should check after that, checksum calculation uses BLCKSZ with
a hardcoded value, so a mismatch would cause computation failures. It
could be possible to not have this restriction if we made the block
size an argument of the checksum calculation though.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2019-03-14 00:35:30 Re: pgsql: Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10().
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-03-14 00:04:41 Re: pg_rewind : feature to rewind promoted standby is broken!