Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [GENERAL] Undetected corruption of table files

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: Albe Laurenz <all(at)adv(dot)magwien(dot)gv(dot)at>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Undetected corruption of table files
Date: 2007-08-31 19:11:29
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> Even if we don't care about folks running on suspect hardware, having a
> CRC would make it far more reasonable to recommend full_page_writes=3Doff.

This argument seems ridiculous.  Finding out that you have corrupt data
is no substitute for not having corrupt data.

> BTW, a method that would buy additional protection would be to compute
> the CRC for a page every time you modify it in such a way that generates
> a WAL record, and record that CRC with the WAL record. That would
> protect from corruption that happened anytime after the page was
> modified, instead of just when smgr went to write it out. How useful
> that is I don't know...

Two words: hint bits.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Decibel!Date: 2007-08-31 19:12:03
Subject: Re: Password requirement in windows installer
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-08-31 18:55:47
Subject: Re: enum types and binary queries

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2007-08-31 19:51:53
Subject: Re: auditing in postgresql
Previous:From: Jeff DavisDate: 2007-08-31 18:47:00
Subject: Re: auditing in postgresql

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group