| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Enabling Checksums |
| Date: | 2013-04-24 00:10:44 |
| Message-ID: | 1366762244.2646.252.camel@sussancws0025 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 16:28 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> * make the pg_control.data_checksums field into a version number, for
> future flexibility...
> patch attached
Commenting on this separately because it's a separate issue.
I'd prefer that it was some kind of a checksum ID code -- e.g. 0 for no
checksum, 1 for FNV-1a-SR3, etc. That would allow us to release 9.4 with
a new algorithm without forcing existing users to change.
initdb would have to take the code as an option, probably in string
form.
What do you think?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Gudeman | 2013-04-24 01:09:15 | a patch for row-at-a-time execution for table functions |
| Previous Message | Timothy Garnett | 2013-04-23 23:53:39 | Allowing parallel pg_restore from pipe |