| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Enabling Checksums |
| Date: | 2012-12-17 19:29:21 |
| Message-ID: | 29774.1355772561@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Discussing this makes me realise that we need a more useful response
> than just "your data is corrupt", so user can respond "yes, I know,
> I'm trying to save whats left".
> We'll need a way of expressing some form of corruption tolerance.
> zero_damaged_pages is just insane, much better if we set
> corruption_tolerance = N to allow us to skip N corrupt pages before
> failing, with -1 meaning keep skipping for ever. Settable by superuser
> only.
Define "skip". Extra points if it makes sense for an index. And what
about things like pg_clog pages?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2012-12-17 21:30:29 | Re: Serious problem: media recovery fails after system or PostgreSQL crash |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-12-17 19:14:22 | Re: Enabling Checksums |