Re: Online checksums patch - once again

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Online checksums patch - once again
Date: 2021-03-09 18:12:06
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:02:02PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 11 Feb 2021, at 14:10, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > I don't think anyone has done anything wrong --- rather, it is what we
> > are _trying_ to do that is complex.
> Global state changes in a cluster are complicated, and are unlikely to never
> not be. By writing patches to attempts such state changes we can see which
> pieces of infrastructure we're lacking to reduce complexity. A good example is
> the ProcSignalBarrier work that Andres and Robert did, inspired in part by this
> patch IIUC. The more we do, the more we learn.

Do we support or document the ability to create a standby with checksums
from a primary without it, and is that a better approach?

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2021-03-09 18:32:27 Re: Fwd: Row description Metadata information
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-03-09 18:08:10 Re: [patch] [doc] Minor variable related cleanup and rewording of plpgsql docs