| From: | Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists(at)yahoo(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Page Checksums |
| Date: | 2011-12-21 16:27:30 |
| Message-ID: | 4EF208F2.6030907@yahoo.it |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> I think what I meant was: isn't this going to be useless in a couple
>> of years (if, say, btrfs will be available)? Or it actually gives
>> something that FS will never be able to give?
>
> Yes, it will help you find/address bugs in the filesystem. These things
> are not unheard of...
It sounds to me like a huge job to fix some issues "not unheard of"...
My point is: if we are trying to fix misbehaving drives/controllers
(something that is more common than one might think), that's already
done by ZFS on Solaris and FreeBSD, and will be done in btrfs for linux.
I understand not trusting drives/controllers; but not trusting a
filesystem...
What am I missing? (I'm far from being an expert... I just don't
understand...)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-12-21 16:34:08 | Re: Page Checksums |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-12-21 16:24:28 | Re: CLOG contention |