From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
Subject: | Re: Online enabling of checksums |
Date: | 2018-03-26 20:09:08 |
Message-ID: | ff4621e3-2b6b-7fe3-bda1-0678c98ac799@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I see enable_data_checksums() does this:
if (cost_limit <= 0)
ereport(ERROR,
(errmsg("cost limit must be a positive value")));
Is there a reason not to allow -1 (no limit), just like for vacuum_cost?
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vladimir Sitnikov | 2018-03-26 20:09:55 | Re: Proposal: http2 wire format |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-03-26 20:05:54 | Re: Why does load_external_function() return PGFunction? |