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

From Andreas Karlsson
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Date
Msg-id fefd05e8-26e3-5453-2c51-c56b67326629@proxel.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 01/21/2017 04:48 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Fujii Masao (masao.fujii@gmail.com) wrote:
>> If the performance overhead by the checksums is really negligible,
>> we may be able to get rid of wal_log_hints parameter, as well.
>
> Prior benchmarks showed it to be on the order of a few percent, as I
> recall, so I'm not sure that we can say it's negligible (and that's not
> why Magnus was proposing changing the default).

It might be worth looking into using the CRC CPU instruction to reduce 
this overhead, like we do for the WAL checksums. Since that is a 
different algorithm it would be a compatibility break and we would need 
to support the old algorithm for upgraded clusters..

Andreas



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?