| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, david(at)fetter(dot)org, aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca, stark(at)mit(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 |
| Date: | 2012-02-20 00:20:07 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoaih1wHMshuQd7L0eBUEcbuCb2UvUg3b1UuOCfr0dzS4A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> To me, it seems that you are applying a double standard. You have
>> twice attempted to insist that I do extra work to make major features
>> that I worked on - unlogged tables and index-only scans - work in Hot
>> Standby mode, despite the existence of significant technological
>> obstacles. But when it comes to your own feature, you simply state
>> that it cannot be done, and therefore we need not do it. Of course,
>> this feature, like those, CAN be made to work.
>
> Vitriol aside, If you would be so kind as to explain how it is
> possible, as you claim, I'll look into making it work.
It would require a double-write buffer of some kind.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2012-02-20 00:27:24 | Re: Future of our regular expression code |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-02-20 00:17:41 | Re: Reducing bgwriter wakeups |