Re: Enable data checksums by default
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>,
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com>,
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-07-30T12:09:47Z
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 30 Jul 2025, at 11:58, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote: > > On Tue, 2025-07-29 at 20:24 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote: >> So, what should we do with the PG18 open item? We (the RMT team) would >> like to know if we shall keep the checksums enabled by default, and if >> there's something that still needs to be done for PG18. > > I don't have a strong opinion, but I lean towards having them on > by default. I agree with that, while there might be a lot of cases where disabling checksums is the right move it's still a sane default. -- Daniel Gustafsson