From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Checksums by default? |
Date: | 2017-01-21 14:05:08 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQ__KQdDfc3nFhACjJH72-VzUfwr1MYFE8YqTuf2bXEkA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | Postg스포츠 토토SQL |
On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> Is it time to enable checksums by default, and give initdb a switch to turn
> it off instead?
>
> I keep running into situations where people haven't enabled it, because (a)
> they didn't know about it, or (b) their packaging system ran initdb for them
> so they didn't even know they could. And of course they usually figure this
> out once the db has enough data and traffic that the only way to fix it is
> to set up something like slony/bucardo/pglogical and a whole new server to
> deal with it.. (Which is something that would also be good to fix -- but
> having the default changed would be useful as well)
Perhaps that's not mandatory, but I think that one obstacle in
changing this default is to be able to have pg_upgrade work from a
checksum-disabled old instance to a checksum-enabled instance. That
would really help with its adoption.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-01-21 14:07:03 | Re: Checksums by default? |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-01-21 14:03:02 | Re: Checksums by default? |