Re: Enabling Checksums - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Enabling Checksums
Date
Msg-id 20130413131426.GA4604@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Enabling Checksums  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: Enabling Checksums
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 02:38:27PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> In general, we have more flexibility with WAL because there is no
> upgrade issue. It would be nice to share code with the data page
> checksum algorithm; but really we should just use whatever offers the
> best trade-off in terms of complexity, performance, and error detection
> rate.
> 
> I don't think we need to decide all of this right now. Personally, I'm
> satisfied having SIMD checksums on data pages now and leaving WAL
> optimization until later.

As I understand it, SIMD is just a CPU-optimized method for producing a
CRC checksum.  Is that right?  Does it produce the same result as a
non-CPU-optimized CRC calculation?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: tracking aggregated numbers from pg_stat_database
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Enabling Checksums