Re: Detecting corrupted pages earlier

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Detecting corrupted pages earlier
Date: 2003-04-03 19:39:17
Message-ID: 12399.1049398757@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Andrew Sullivan expressed concern about this, too. The thing could
>> be made a little more failsafe if we made it impossible to set
>> ZERO_DAMAGED_PAGES to true in postgresql.conf, or by any means other
>> than an actual SET command --- whose impact would then be limited to
>> the current session. This is kind of an ugly wart on the GUC mechanism,
>> but I think not difficult to do with an assign_hook (it just has to
>> refuse non-interactive settings).

> Fighting against people who randomly change settings without being
> informed about what they do is pointless.

If you don't want an active defense, how about a passive one --- like
just not listing zero_damaged_pages in postgresql.conf.sample? We
already have several variables deliberately not listed there ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruno Wolff III 2003-04-03 21:01:47 Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] OSS database needed for testing
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2003-04-03 19:12:03 Re: more contrib: log rotator