Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> Oh. I thought we'd agreed that a CRC on each stored disk block would
>> be a good idea as well. I take it you didn't do that.
> No, I thought we agreed disk block CRC was way overkill. If the CRC on
> the WAL log checks for errors that are not checked anywhere else, then
> fine, but I thought disk CRC would just duplicate the I/O subsystem/disk
> checks.
A disk-block CRC would detect partially written blocks (ie, power drops
after disk has written M of the N sectors in a block). The disk's own
checks will NOT consider this condition a failure. I'm not convinced
that WAL will reliably detect it either (Vadim?). Certainly WAL will
not help for corruption caused by external agents, away from any updates
that are actually being performed/logged.
regards, tom lane