| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: doc: update the default of data checksums in the doc of pg_rewind |
| Date: | 2025-12-25 00:21:52 |
| Message-ID: | FC8F888C-4723-4D02-846D-13D442913FD1@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Dec 24, 2025, at 15:27, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that the pg_rewind documentation still states that data
> checksums is disabled by default, but it has been changed to on since PG18.
>
> Here's a small patch to update this.
>
> Best Regards,
> Hou zj
> <v1-0001-Fix-outdated-doc-in-pg_rewind.patch>
```
- the cluster was initialized with <application>initdb</application>. Neither of these
- are currently on by default. <xref linkend="guc-full-page-writes"/>
- must also be set to <literal>on</literal>, but is enabled by default.
+ the cluster was initialized with <application>initdb</application> (the latter
+ being the default). <xref linkend="guc-full-page-writes"/> must also be set
+ to <literal>on</literal>, but is enabled by default.
```
I think we can explicitly mention PG18 and later, like:
```
the cluster was initialized with <application>initdb</application>
(data checksums are enabled by default in PostgreSQL 18 and later).
```
I searched over the docs, the usage of “<version> and later” is not rare, for example:
```
<para>
<application>pg_amcheck</application> is designed to work with
<productname>PostgreSQL</productname> 14.0 and later.
</para>
```
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-12-25 00:24:57 | Re: Fwd: [PATCH] Add zstd compression for TOAST using extended header format |
| Previous Message | Naga Appani | 2025-12-25 00:09:14 | Re: [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring |