| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, 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: | 2019-03-22 23:31:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20190322233136.GB20584@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 07:02:36PM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Indeed it does, and it is done in update_controlfile if the last argument is
> true. Basically update_controlfile latest version always fsync the control
> file, unless explicitely told not to do so. The options to do that are
> really there only to speed up non regression tests.
For the control file, it would not really matter much, and the cost
would be really coming from syncing the data directory, still for
correctness it is better to have a full all-or-nothing switch. Small
buildfarm machines also like the --no-sync flavors a lot.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-22 23:55:42 | Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-22 23:16:07 | Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums |