Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups
Date
Msg-id 20181102003359.GQ1727@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verification inbase backups  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 04:44:40PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> This sounds like a good argument for having a whitelist approach, but
> is it really a big problem if a user gets warning for files that the
> utility is not able to verify checksums for?  I think in some sense
> this message can be useful to the user as it can allow him to know
> which files are not verified by the utility for some form of
> corruption.  I guess one can say that users might not be interested in
> this information in which case such a check could be optional as you
> seem to be suggesting in the following paragraph.

The replication protocol supports NOVERIFY_CHECKSUMS to avoid the
warnings so they enabled by default, and can be disabled at will.
pg_basebackup supports the same interface.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: partitioned indexes and tablespaces
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: INSTALL file