On 8/27/07, Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/27/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > that and the lack of evidence that they'd actually gain anything
>
> I find it somewhat ironic that PostgreSQL strives to be fairly
> non-corruptable, yet has no way to detect a corrupted page. The only
> reason for not having CRCs is because it will slow down performance...
> which is exactly opposite of conventional PostgreSQL wisdom (no
> performance trade-off for durability).
But how does detecting a corrupted data page gain you any durability?
All it means is that the platform underneath screwed up, and you've
already *lost* durability. What do you do then?
It seems like the same idea as an application trying to detect RAM errors.
