Re: Enabling Checksums
Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
From: Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, Ants Aasma <ants@cybertec.at>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-03-23T04:26:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 3/18/13 2:25 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 18 March 2013 19:02, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 22:26 -0700, Daniel Farina wrote: >>> as long as I am able to turn them off easily >> >> To be clear: you don't get the performance back by doing >> "ignore_checksum_failure = on". You only get around the error itself, >> which allows you to dump/reload the good data. > > Given that the worst pain point comes from setting hint bits during a > large SELECT, it makes sense to offer an option to simply skip hint > bit setting when we are reading data (SELECT, not > INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE). That seems like a useful option even without > checksums. I know I have seen cases across many releases where setting > that would have been good, since it puts the cleanup back onto > VACUUM/writers, rather than occasional SELECTs. +1