Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nM+WUMu5FvuyK+hPGoxdgMq4xRqd5tFW-qBaDYNt2b8A=Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:

> This chicken-and-egg
> problem requires the checksum to be implemented first.

v2 of checksum patch, using a conditional copy if checksumming is
enabled, so locking is removed.

Thanks to Andres for thwacking me with the cluestick, though I have
used a simple copy rather than a copy & calc.

Tested using make installcheck with parameter on/off, then restart and
vacuumdb to validate all pages.

Reviews, objections, user interface tweaks all welcome.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thom Brown
Date:
Subject: Re: Misleading CREATE TABLE error
Next
From: Brar Piening
Date:
Subject: Re: Review of VS 2010 support patches