| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Brad Nicholson <bradn(at)ca(dot)ibm(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Grigory Smolkin <g(dot)smolkin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Re: Enabling checksums on a streaming replica |
| Date: | 2019-06-29 02:27:09 |
| Message-ID: | 20190629022709.GC2191@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 07:43:30AM -0400, Brad Nicholson wrote:
> So if all the checksums are being recalculated on the replica, this
> approach should be relatively safe, should it not?
Yep.
> Assuming pg_checksums is doing the right thing (and it looks to me like it
> should be).
The constraint that a cluster needs to be cleanly shut down to be able
to enable checksums with pg_checksums is the actual deal here. After
that of course comes the WAL retention on the primary or in the WAL
archives that a standby would need again to catch up while it was
offline.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Igal @ Lucee.org | 2019-06-29 02:53:50 | Trigger function does not modify the NEW value |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2019-06-29 00:01:46 | Re: create extension points to the wrong directory |