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

From Ants Aasma
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Date
Msg-id CA+CSw_sH3TaAjBDnYYQJfP+NbBROsYbGSi+3LPOZF1khstURTg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Oh, that's why we will hopefully eventually change the page checksum
> algorithm to use the special CRC32 instruction, and set a new checksum
> version --- got it.  I assume there is currently no compile-time way to
> do this.

Using CRC32 as implemented now for the WAL would be significantly
slower than what we have now due to instruction latency. Even the best
theoretical implementation using the CRC32 instruction would still be
about the same speed than what we have now. I haven't seen anybody
working on swapping out the current algorithm. And I don't really see
a reason to, it would introduce a load of headaches for no real gain.

Regards,
Ants Aasma



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] case_preservation_and_insensitivity = on
Next
From: Ants Aasma
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?