Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMKGYB5z7NAbeyUn0w7M8Aq6Bh5ai5bQ-ocESsr_kCPT8w@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 Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > 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? And of course, as soon as I wrote that I thought of the problem. We mustn't make a write that hasn't been covered by a FPW, so we must know ahead of time whether to WAL log hints or not. We can't simply turn it on/off any longer, now that we have to WAL log hint bits also. So thanks for making me think of that. We *could* make it turn on/off at each checkpoint, but its easier just to say that it can be turned on/off at server start. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: