Re: pgsql: Revert online data checksum transitions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: pgsql: Revert online data checksum transitions
Date
Msg-id CAHGQGwFLNCA9nVHSsC_=G_mvsK_fAFb+QbJAL7=R9cK2PL9ZBQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: pgsql: Revert online data checksum transitions  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Responses Re: pgsql: Revert online data checksum transitions
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 8:08 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
> Ugh, I thought I had tested everything but clearly missed this one. Will fix immediately when back from lunch.

Here are another comments:

data_checksum_version field in xl_checkpoint_redo struct should be removed?
Otherwise, it seems to be included in WAL records unnecessarily even though
it is no longer used. No?


-       database (or on a shared object), or NULL if data checksums are
-       disabled.
-      </para></entry>
+       database (or on a shared object).  Detected failures are not reset if
+       the <xref linkend="guc-data-checksums"/> setting changes.  Clusters
+       which are initialized without data checksums will show this as
+       <literal>0</literal>. In <productname>PostgreSQL</productname> version
+       18 and earlier, this was set to <literal>NULL</literal> for clusters
+       with data checksums disabled.
+      </para>
+     </entry>
...
-       this database (or on a shared object), or NULL if data checksums are
-       disabled.
+       this database (or on a shared object). Last failure is reported
+       regardless of the <xref linkend="guc-data-checksums"/> setting.

These updates to monitoring.sgml from commit f19c0eccae9 also should be
reverted? checksum_failures and checksum_last_failure seem to return
NULL again when data checksums are disabled, so their descriptions would
otherwise be incorrect.


checksum_enable_offline() and checksum_disable_offline() in
Cluster.pm also seem to be unused now. Should they be removed as well?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: wenhui qiu
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] Optimize 64-bit atomic access on RV64
Next
From: Xuneng Zhou
Date:
Subject: Re: WAIT FOR NO_THROW option could use some documentation