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

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups
Date
Msg-id 20190806160706.GV29202@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verificationin base backups  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: More issues with pg_verify_checksums and checksum verification inbase backups  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Andres Freund (andres@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2019-08-06 10:58:15 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Michael Banck (michael.banck@credativ.de) wrote:
> > > Independently of the whitelist/blacklist question, I believe
> > > pg_checksums should not error out as soon as it encounters a weird looking
> > > file, but either (i) still checksum it or (ii) skip it? Or is that to be
> > > considered a pilot error and it's fine for pg_checksums to fold?
> >
> > imv, random files that we don't know about are exactly 'pilot error' to
> > be complained about..  This is exactly why the whitelist idea falls
> > over.
>
> I still think this whole assumption is bad, and that you're fixing
> non-problems, and creating serious usability issues with zero benefits.

I doubt we're going to get to agreement on this, unfortunately.

Thanks,

Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)