Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Josh Berkus
Тема Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Дата
Msg-id 4F4FC2AC.9070004@agliodbs.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
>> So a relation can't have some pages in Version 9.2, and other pages in
>> version 9.3?  How will this work for 2TB tables?
> 
> Not very well, but better than Tom's proposal to require upgrading the
> entire cluster in a single off-line operation.

Yes, but the result will be that anyone with a 2TB table will *never*
convert it to the new format.  Which means we can never deprecate that
format, because lots of people will still be using it.

I continue to assert that all of this sounds like 9.3 work to me.  I'm
really not keen on pushing through a hack which will make pushing in a
long-term solution harder.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2
Следующее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement