From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Online checksums patch - once again |
Date: | 2021-02-10 18:32:42 |
Message-ID: | 5d76b0d4-3296-9238-b38e-b8112cccb588@iki.fi |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/02/2021 16:25, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 9:54 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
>>
>> (I may have said this before, but) My overall high-level impression of
>> this patch is that it's really cmmplex for a feature that you use maybe
>> once in the lifetime of a cluster. I'm happy to review but I'm not
>> planning to commit this myself. I don't object if some other committer
>> picks this up (Magnus?).
>
> A fairly large amount of this complexity comes out of the fact that it
> now supports restarting and tracks checksums on a per-table basis. We
> skipped this in the original patch for exactly this reason (that's not
> to say there isn't a fair amount of complexity even without it, but it
> did substantially i increase both the size and the complexity of the
> patch), but in the review of that i was specifically asked for having
> that added. I personally don't think it's worth that complexity but at
> the time that seemed to be a pretty strong argument. So I'm not
> entirely sure how to move forward with that...
>
> is your impression that it would still be too complicated, even without that?
I'm not sure. It would certainly be a lot better.
Wrt. restartability, I'm also not very happy with the way that works -
or rather doesn't :-) - in this patch. After shutting down and
restarting the cluster, you have to manually call
pg_enable_data_checksums() again to restart the checksumming process.
- Heikki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2021-02-10 18:34:23 | Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: Foreign Key Arrays |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-02-10 18:26:18 | Re: Online checksums patch - once again |