Re: Enabling Checksums

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Enabling Checksums
Date: 2013-03-04 20:22:24
Message-ID: 1362428544.23497.43.camel@sussancws0025
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 11:52 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> I also suspect that at least in the first release it might be desirable
> to have an option that essentially says "something's gone horribly wrong
> and we no longer want to check or write checksums, we want a
> non-checksummed DB that can still read our data from before we turned
> checksumming off". Essentially, a way for someone who's trying
> checksumming in production after their staging tests worked out OK to
> abort and go back to the non-checksummed case without having to do a
> full dump and reload.

A recovery option to extract data sounds like a good idea, but I don't
want to go as far as you are suggesting here.

An option to ignore checksum failures (while still printing the
warnings) sounds like all we need here. I think Greg's point that the
page might be written out again (hiding the corruption) is a very good
one, but the same is true for zero_damaged_pages. So we can just still
allow the writes to proceed (including setting the checksum on write),
and the system should be as available as it would be without checksums.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2013-03-04 20:22:27 Re: Bug in tm2timestamp
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2013-03-04 20:17:56 Re: Bug in tm2timestamp