Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Дата
Msg-id 17496.1485223286@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
> Perhaps I've missed the point entirely, but, I have to ask: How could
> there ever be false positives?

Bugs.  For example, checksum is computed while somebody else is setting
a hint bit in the page, so that what is written out is completely valid
except that the checksum doesn't match.  (I realize that that specific
scenario should be impossible given our implementation, but I hope you
aren't going to claim that bugs in the checksum code are impossible.)

Maybe this is a terminology problem.  I'm taking "false positive" to mean
"checksum reports a failure, but in fact there is no observable data
corruption".  Depending on why the false positive occurred, that might
help alert you to underlying storage problems, but it isn't helping you
with respect to being able to access your perfectly valid data.
        regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?