Re: data checksums

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com>
Cc: bruno vieira da silva <brunogiovs(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: data checksums
Date: 2024-08-07 07:41:18
Message-ID: DDF016B5-F5CD-4143-A2C7-89BDE6F61FBE@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> On 6 Aug 2024, at 18:29, Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Aug 6, 2024, at 08:11, bruno vieira da silva <brunogiovs(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>> the pg doc
>> mentions a considerable performance penality, how considerable it is?
>
> That line is probably somewhat out of date at this point. We haven't seen a significant slowdown in enabling them on any modern hardware. I always turn them on, except on the type of filesystems/hardware mentioned above.

The last in-depth analysis of data checksums (and hint bits) overhead that I
can remember is from 2019:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20190330192543.GH4719%40development

Hardware advances in the last five years may very well have made these findings
irrelevant however.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2024-08-07 08:09:39 Re: ANALYZE on partitioned tables vs on individual partitions
Previous Message Michael Harris 2024-08-07 07:20:19 Re: ANALYZE on partitioned tables vs on individual partitions