Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>, david@fetter.org, aidan@highrise.ca, stark@mit.edu, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2012-02-29T15:46:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Wakeup WALWriter as needed for asynchronous commit performance.

On 29.02.2012 17:42, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>  wrote:
>
>> Surely it can be done online. You'll just need a third state between off and
>> on, where checksums are written but not verified, while the cluster is
>> scanned.
>
> Are you saying you would accept the patch if we had this?

I think I would still be uncomfortable with the hacks in the page 
header. Less so than in the current form - you wouldn't need a flag to 
indicate whether the page has a valid checksum or not, which would clean 
it up quite a bit - but still.

-- 
   Heikki Linnakangas
   EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com