Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMJWoH+tZJ01CvFs9aqnziMCzCvboj4uA75dGVEZOg0SQQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > There needs to be a well-documented way of turning it on/off. In particular, > from off to on. There is.... in the patch. The checksum field is optional, as is the parameter. If page_checksums is on, we write a checksum and it is correct. We also validate any checksums we see. If page_checksums is off we clear the checksum on write, so an incorrect checksum is never written. So there isn't any problem with there being incorrect checksums on blocks and you can turn the parameter on and off as often and as easily as you want. I think it can be USERSET but I wouldn't want to encourage users to see turning it off as a performance tuning feature. If the admin turns it on for the server, its on, so its SIGHUP. Any holes in that I haven't noticed? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: