| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: WIP checksums patch |
| Date: | 2012-10-01 17:40:46 |
| Message-ID: | 1349113246.15580.63.camel@jdavis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 18:14 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> You are missing large parts of the previous thread, giving various
> opinions on what the UI should look like for enabling checksums.
I read through all of the discussion that I could find. There was quite
a lot, so perhaps I have forgotten pieces of it.
But that one section in the docs does look out of date and/or confusing
to me.
I remember there was discussion about a way to ensure that checksums are
set cluster-wide with some kind of special command (perhaps related to
VACUUM) and a magic file to let recovery know whether checksums are set
everywhere or not. That doesn't necessarily conflict with the GUC though
(the GUC could be a way to write checksums lazily, while this new
command could be a way to write checksums eagerly).
If some consensus was reached on the exact user interface, can you
please send me a link?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Selena Deckelmann | 2012-10-01 19:37:19 | Re: setting per-database/role parameters checks them against wrong context |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-10-01 17:22:19 | Re: WIP checksums patch |