Re: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
From: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
To: Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>
Cc: Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurjeet@gmail.com>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-11-09T17:31:01Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca> wrote: > So, for getting checksums, we have to offer up a few things: > 1) zero-copy writes, we need to buffer the write to get a consistent > checksum (or lock the buffer tight) > 2) saving hint-bits on an otherwise unchanged page. We either need to > just not write that page, and loose the work the hint-bits did, or do > a full-page WAL of it, so the torn-page checksum is fixed Actually the consensus the last go-around on this topic was to segregate the hint bits into a single area of the page and skip them in the checksum. That way we don't have to do any of the above. It's just that that's a lot of work. -- greg