| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_control_checkpoint(): add "data_checksum_version" (Pg19)? |
| Date: | 2026-08-11 14:38:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwHihdaqfY-GoBzPyNAa0fJaQjH+C7ZcqT2mbRA4rL_0dA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 3:07 AM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
> I originally opted against displaying the mapped name to keep
> pg_control_checkpoint a way to extract the raw data, but thinking about it
> might be more useful to show the mapped value since the mapping is private.
I suggested making pg_controldata report the latest checkpoint's checksum state
as text rather than as a version. But, I found that pg_controldata reports
similar information "Data page checksum version", and pg_control_init()
exposes data_page_checksum_version as an integer version.
This makes me wonder whether we should drop my suggestion and keep the latest
checkpoint's checksum field as a version as well, or instead move toward
reporting textual checksum states consistently in all these places.
Or is there another approach that would make more sense?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2026-08-11 14:41:22 | Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications |
| Previous Message | Andrey Rachitskiy | 2026-08-11 14:31:26 | Fix PGTYPESdate_fmt_asc overflow when a year does not fit "yyyy" |