Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, 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: 2019-03-15 08:47:09
Message-ID: 20190315084709.GB6370@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 09:04:51AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> ISTM this would not run fsync_parent_path() unless the first fsync fails
> which is not the intended use. I guess we need two ifs here?

Yes, let's do that. Let's see if others have input to offer about the
patch. This thread is gathering attention, which is good.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Wu, Fei 2019-03-15 08:50:49 Willing to fix a TODO case in libpq module
Previous Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2019-03-15 08:30:07 Re: Problem with default partition pruning