Re: WIP checksums patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: WIP checksums patch
Date
Msg-id 1349111049.15580.49.camel@jdavis
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP checksums patch  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: WIP checksums patch  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Re: WIP checksums patch  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
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?

I'm missing something here. Are we worried about users who turn the GUC
on and then expect all of their old data pages to magically be
protected?

Regards,Jeff Davis





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: embedded list v3