| From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: clarify "rewritten" in pg_checksums docs |
| Date: | 2020-09-01 13:44:06 |
| Message-ID: | 55BA957E-9C2B-4781-B78D-36987ACBB611@yesql.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 1 Sep 2020, at 15:34, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 01.09.2020, 15:29 +0200 schrieb Daniel Gustafsson:
>> Isn't "modified in-place" a more accurate description of the process?
>
> AIUI we do rewrite the whole file (block by block, after updating the
> page header with the checksum), so yeah, I though about using modified
> instead but then decided rewritten is pretty (or even more) accurate.
Well, I was thinking less technically accurate and more descriptive for end
users, hiding the implementation details. "Rewrite" sounds to me more like
changing data rather than amending pages with a checksum keeping data intact.
Either way, adding "in-place" is an improvement IMO.
cheers ./daniel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2020-09-01 13:50:13 | Re: Online checksums patch - once again |
| Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2020-09-01 13:34:11 | Re: clarify "rewritten" in pg_checksums docs |