Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nM+Q7sNVw4+1mUYi=xykrFuO9V+v8WVAPwjVfAp8NGdxjA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: >> Simon, all, >> >> * Simon Riggs (simon@2ndQuadrant.com) wrote: >>> (1) report all errors on a page, including errors that don't change >>> PostgreSQL data. This involves checksumming long strings of zeroes, >>> which the checksum algorithm can't tell apart from long strings of >>> ones. >> >> Do we actually know when/where it's supposed to be all zeros, and hence >> could we check for that explicitly? If we know what it's supposed to >> be, in order to be consistent with other information, I could certainly >> see value in actually checking that. > > Yes, we can. Excellent suggestion, will implement. No, we can't. I discover that non-all-zeroes holes are fairly common, just not very frequent. That may or may not be a problem, but not something to be dealt with here and now. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: