From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WIP checksums patch |
Date: | 2012-10-01 17:14:18 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKiK=cBNMp=hHLze8kPvaygTswjnHv4TS-3tReOSxJSkQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1 October 2012 18:04, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 12:35 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> The heap/index files are copied unmodified from the old cluster, so
>> there are no checksums on the pages.
>
> That's fine though, the patch still reads the old format the same way,
> and the pages are treated as though they have no checksum.
> How is that a
> reason for defaulting the GUC to off?
It's not.
> Are we worried about users who turn the GUC
> on and then expect all of their old data pages to magically be
> protected?
Yes, but as you say, that is a separate consideration.
You are missing large parts of the previous thread, giving various
opinions on what the UI should look like for enabling checksums.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-10-01 17:14:33 | Re: WIP checksums patch |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-10-01 17:13:49 | Re: WIP checksums patch |