Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Stephen Frost
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Дата
Msg-id 20170125192409.GP9812@tamriel.snowman.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
* Peter Geoghegan (pg@heroku.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Trying to force those people to use checksums is just masterminding;
> > they've made their own decision that it's not worth bothering with.
> > When something goes wrong, WE still care about distinguishing hardware
> > failure from PostgreSQL failure.   Our pride is on the line.  But the
> > customer often doesn't.  The DBA isn't the same person as the
> > operating system guy, and the operating system guy isn't going to
> > listen to the DBA even if the DBA complains of checksum failures.
>
> We need to invest in corruption detection/verification tools that are
> run on an as-needed basis. They are available to users of every other
> major database system.

Agreed.

Thanks!

Stephen

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?
Следующее
От: Wang Hao
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Should buffer of initialization fork have a BM_PERMANENT flag