Re: Enable data checksums by default

Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com>

From: Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com>

To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2024-08-27T13:44:39Z

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 →

Avoid BufferGetLSNAtomic() calls during nbtree scans.
- e6eed40e4441 18.0 cited
doc PG 18 relnotes: Add incompatibility note about checksums now default
- 48814415d5aa 18.0 landed
Fix pg_upgrade's cross-version tests when old < 18
- 38c18710b37a 18.0 landed
initdb: Change default to using data checksums.
- 04bec894a04c 18.0 landed
Allow TAP tests to force checksums off when calling init()
- e7d0cf42b1ac 18.0 landed
initdb: Add new option "--no-data-checksums"
- 983a588e0b86 18.0 landed
Tweak docs to reduce possible impact of data checksums
- efd72a3d422b 18.0 landed

On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 3:46 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Should we error if both --data-checksum and --no-data-checksums are
> specified?  IIUC with 0001, we'll use whichever is specified last.
>

Hmmm, that is a good question. We have never (to my recollection) flipped a
default quite like this before. I'm inclined to leave it as "last one
wins", as I can see automated systems appending their desired selection to
the end of the arg list, and expecting it to work.

nitpick: these 4 patches are small enough that they could likely be
> combined and committed together.
>

This was split per request upthread, which I do agree with.

I think it's fair to say we should make the pg_upgrade experience nicer
> once the default changes, but IMHO that needn't block actually changing the
> default.
>

+1

Cheers,
Greg