Re: Online checksums patch - once again
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Online checksums patch - once again |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABUevExL7VaUTm17qzw7PS64Uhopcwy+crMZqHPi-YkqgjUJzw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Online checksums patch - once again (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Online checksums patch - once again
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:53 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 02:49:44PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 01:03:20PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Other than bots, this patch doesn't seem to have attracted any reviewers
> > > this time around. Perhaps you need to bribe someone? (Maybe "how sad
> > > your committer SSH key stopped working" would do?)
> > >
> >
> > Hmm. I don't think that's a bribe, that's a threat. However, maybe it will
> > work.
> >
>
> IMHO the patch is ready to go - I think the global barrier solves the
> issue in the previous version, and that's the only problem I'm aware of.
> So +1 from me to go ahead and push it.
>
> And now please uncomment my commit SSH key again, please ;-)
For adding cluster-level encryption to Postgres, the plan is to create a
standby that has encryption enabled, then switchover to it. Is that a
method we support now for adding checksums to Postgres? Do we need the
ability to do it in-place too?
I definitely think we need the ability to do it in-place as well, yes.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: