Re: Enabling Checksums

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Enabling Checksums
Date: 2013-01-24 21:03:41
Message-ID: 1359061421.601.39.camel@jdavis
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 17:38 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> New version of checksums patch.

And another new version of both patches.

Changes:
* Rebased.
* Rename SetBufferCommitInfoNeedsSave to MarkBufferDirtyHint. Now that
it's being used more places, it makes sense to give it a more generic
name.
* My colleague, Yingjie He, noticed that the FSM doesn't write any WAL,
and therefore we must protect those operations against torn pages. That
seems simple enough: just use MarkBufferDirtyHint (formerly
SetBufferCommitInfoNeedsSave) instead of MarkBufferDirty. The FSM
changes are not critical, so the fact that we may lose the dirty bit is
OK.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

Attachment Content-Type Size
replace-tli-with-checksums-20130124.patch.gz application/x-gzip 8.8 KB
checksums-20130124.patch.gz application/x-gzip 20.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2013-01-24 21:04:04 Re: BUG #6510: A simple prompt is displayed using wrong charset
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2013-01-24 20:59:42 Re: [HACKERS] BUG #6572: The example of SPI_execute is bogus