Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Date
Msg-id 20170121165411.GJ18360@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Andreas Karlsson (andreas@proxel.se) wrote:
> On 01/21/2017 04:48 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >* Fujii Masao (masao.fujii@gmail.com) wrote:
> >>If the performance overhead by the checksums is really negligible,
> >>we may be able to get rid of wal_log_hints parameter, as well.
> >
> >Prior benchmarks showed it to be on the order of a few percent, as I
> >recall, so I'm not sure that we can say it's negligible (and that's not
> >why Magnus was proposing changing the default).
>
> It might be worth looking into using the CRC CPU instruction to
> reduce this overhead, like we do for the WAL checksums. Since that
> is a different algorithm it would be a compatibility break and we
> would need to support the old algorithm for upgraded clusters..

+1.

I'd be all for removing the option and requiring checksums if we do that
and it turns out that the performance hit ends up being less than 1%.

Thanks!

Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?