| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Enable data checksums by default |
| Date: | 2024-08-26 19:46:39 |
| Message-ID: | Zszbn8nThNkOkHon@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
In general, +1 for $SUBJECT.
printf(_(" -k, --data-checksums use data page checksums\n"));
+ printf(_(" --no-data-checksums do not use data page checksums\n"));
Should we error if both --data-checksum and --no-data-checksums are
specified? IIUC with 0001, we'll use whichever is specified last.
nitpick: these 4 patches are small enough that they could likely be
combined and committed together.
I think it's fair to say we should make the pg_upgrade experience nicer
once the default changes, but IMHO that needn't block actually changing the
default.
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-08-26 19:54:33 | Re: Index AM API cleanup |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-08-26 19:44:11 | Re: allowing extensions to control planner behavior |