Re: Checksums, state of play

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Checksums, state of play
Date: 2012-03-06 17:00:25
Message-ID: CA+U5nMKvmQVTHhU=wyDRqzTMem-gfbhZp4U1c=STJ728szoc+Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> As to whether we should increment pd_pagesize_version, I'm not sure
> quite what you were saying about that (I think you may have an extra
> or missing word there), but I don't think it's necessary here.

I said this...

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Do you know of any PostgreSQL variant that can set this byte range to
> different values?

Not sure what the missing word is there, so I'll ask again.

Has EDB or anybody else you know of has used the pd_pagesize_version
field for something else, so you'd rather I didn't touch that?

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-03-06 17:13:57 Re: Checksums, state of play
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-03-06 16:50:53 Re: Checksums, state of play