| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Checksums by default? |
| Date: | 2017-01-26 14:52:11 |
| Message-ID: | a240a4e9-dcfa-df00-c725-3cb98b62cc23@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/25/2017 05:25 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>> I understand that my experience with storage devices is unusually
>> narrow compared to everyone else here. That's why I remain neutral on
>> the high level question of whether or not we ought to enable checksums
>> by default. I'll ask other hackers to answer what may seem like a very
>> naive question, while bearing what I just said in mind. The question
>> is: Have you ever actually seen a checksum failure in production? And,
>> if so, how helpful was it?
No.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-26 14:53:35 | Re: CONNECTION LIMIT and Parallel Query don't play well together |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-26 14:36:31 | Re: pg_hba_file_settings view patch |