Re: RFC: Add 'taint' field to pg_control.

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RFC: Add 'taint' field to pg_control.
Date: 2018-02-28 22:18:12
Message-ID: 20180228221812.mvk4h2rzxquqhbnr@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2018-02-28 17:14:18 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I can see why you'd want that, but as a DBA, I don't necessarily want
> all of that recorded, especially in a quasi-permanent way.

Huh? You're arguing that we should make it easier for DBAs to hide
potential causes of corruption? I fail to see when that's necessary /
desirable? That a cluster ran with fsync=off isn't an embarassing thing,
nor does it contain private data...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-02-28 22:20:31 Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2018-02-28 22:16:53 Re: RFC: Add 'taint' field to pg_control.