From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Enabling Checksums |
Date: | 2012-11-11 20:20:23 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRA6q9BfDwbp9C=Y7F0WUkXYD5NA7QGH4krvKOT7zu+dEw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello
>
>> > Does it make sense to store this information in pg_control? That doesn't
>> > require adding any new file, and it has the benefit that it's already
>> > checksummed. It's available during recovery and can be made available
>> > pretty easily in the places where we write data.
>> >
>> > And the next question is what commands to add to change state. Ideas:
>> >
>> > CHECKSUMS ENABLE; -- set state to "Enabling"
>> > CHECKSUMS DISABLE; -- set state to "Off"
>>
>> Don't like this, please make it a GUC.
>
> I'll see if you have ideas about how to resolve the problems with a GUC
> that I mentioned above. But if not, then what about using a utility,
> perhaps called pg_checksums? That way we wouldn't need new syntax.
I don't think so GUC are good for this purpouse, but I don't like
single purpouse statements too.
what do you think about enhancing ALTER DATABASE statement
some like
ALTER DATABASE name ENABLE CHECKSUMS and ALTER DATABASE name DISABLE CHECKSUMS
Regards
Pavel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-11-11 22:52:20 | Re: Enabling Checksums |
Previous Message | Matthew Gerber | 2012-11-11 20:01:51 | Re: Unresolved error 0xC0000409 on Windows Server |