From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | BGoebel <b(dot)goebel(at)prisma-computer(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Using of --data-checksums |
Date: | 2020-04-08 02:29:30 |
Message-ID: | 20200408022930.GD1606@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 08:10:13AM -0700, BGoebel wrote:
> initdb --data-checksums "... help to detect corruption by the I/O system"
> There is an (negligible?) impact on performance, ok.
>
> Is there another reason NOT to use this feature ?
> Has anyone had good or bad experience with the use of --data-checksums?
FWIW, I have a good experience with it. Note that some performance
impact of up to ~1% may be noticeable if you have a large number of
buffer evictions from PostgreSQL shared buffer pool, but IMO the
insurance of knowing that Postgres is not the cause of an on-disk
corruption is largely worth it (in applications where I got that
enabled we did not notice any performance impact even in very heavy
production-like workloads, and this even if we had a rather low shared
buffer setting with a much larger set of hot pages, causing the OS
cache to be filled with most of the hot data).
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-04-08 07:32:22 | Re: Mixed Locales and Upgrading |
Previous Message | Devrim Gündüz | 2020-04-08 01:24:05 | Announcing "common" YUM repository |