Re: data-checksums

From: "Rakesh Kumar" <rakeshkumar464(at)mail(dot)com>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: data-checksums
Date: 2018-01-09 19:04:04
Message-ID: trinity-6e592d6e-7902-4df2-8806-95914ae94d12-1515524644593@3c-app-mailcom-lxa04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


> > I also would like to believe that the hit is small, but when PG
> > official document writes "noticeable performance penalty", it becomes
> > difficult to convince management that the hit is small :-)
>
> Why believe, when you can measure?

yup doing that. But I still feel that PG documentation should stay away from such scare mongering. Or did the lawyers write that :)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2018-01-09 19:20:08 Re: data-checksums
Previous Message Rakesh Kumar 2018-01-09 19:02:37 Re: data-checksums