On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I'm not too clear
> about is whether a 16-bit checksum meets the needs of people who want
> checksums.
We need this now, hence the gymnastics to get it into this release.
16-bits of checksum is way better than zero bits of checksum, probably
about a million times better (numbers taken from papers quoted earlier
on effectiveness of checksums).
The strategy I am suggesting is 16-bits now, 32/64 later.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
