Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: data-checksums - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Thomas Poty
Subject Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: data-checksums
Date
Msg-id CAN_ctnjM63ndjeZXSPgt18QRa-aqHQu2i4bJkKNdDjATwrqEVA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: data-checksums  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: data-checksums
List pgsql-general
Hello,
A question seems to be, according to me, important :
How a corruption, detected thanks to data-checksums, is fixed?

Thank you, 
Thomas

Le 10 janv. 2018 20:39, "Andres Freund" <andres@anarazel.de> a écrit :
On 2018-01-09 20:51:17 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> * Andreas Joseph Krogh (andreas@visena.com) wrote:
> > Aha, so enabling CRC causes hint-bits to be written causing extra WAL-logging,
> > which woudn't be the case without CRC enabled?
> > Thanks for pointing that out.
>
> Yes, having checksums enabled forces logging of hint bits.  You can
> enable wal_log_hints independently too, without having checksums, to see
> what kind of an impact it'll have on your environment.
>
> A useful documentation update might be:
>
> ---
> With checksums enabled, wal_log_hints <link to the GUC's documentation>
> will be enabled and each page read or write will involve calculating the
> checksum for the page.
> ---
>
> I'd probably just replace the "Enabling checksums may incur a noticeable
> performance penalty" with the above, as it should be clear that doing
> more work implies an impact on performance and that avoids the whole
> question of trying to characterize in a general way something that can't
> be generalized (as it's workload dependent).

-1. I think this is underplaying the cost.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: data-checksums
Next
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: Sv: Re: data-checksums