| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de, thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums |
| Date: | 2019-04-02 08:10:34 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1904021007150.17899@lancre |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> For pg_checksums, probably some improvement patch will be submitted later,
>> if someone feels like it.
>
> Let's see. I think that what we have now in v12 is good enough for
> checksum operations on an offline cluster. And my take is that we
> should focus more on online checksum verification for v13 and future
> versions.
I agree.
For online, we should want throttling so that the check can have a reduced
performance impact when scrubbing.
--
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2019-04-02 09:27:08 | Re: partitioned tables referenced by FKs |
| Previous Message | Jamison, Kirk | 2019-04-02 08:00:55 | RE: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VS query mean time |