From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Enabling Checksums |
Date: | 2013-03-03 14:22:16 |
Message-ID: | 51335C98.9050104@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/02/2013 12:48 AM, Daniel Farina wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Attached is some bit rot updates to the checksums patches. The replace-tli
>> one still works fine....
> I rather badly want this feature, and if the open issues with the
> patch has hit zero, I'm thinking about applying it, shipping it, and
> turning it on. Given that the heap format has not changed, the main
> affordence I may check for is if I can work in backwards compatibility
> (while not maintaining the checksums, of course) in case of an
> emergency.
Did you get a chance to see whether you can run it in
checksum-validation-and-update-off backward compatible mode? This seems
like an important thing to have working (and tested for) in case of
bugs, performance issues or other unforseen circumstances.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2013-03-03 14:28:55 | Re: in-catalog Extension Scripts and Control parameters (templates?) |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2013-03-03 14:15:57 | Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables |