Re: [HACKERS] Checksums by default?

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> Would you say that most user's databases run fast enough with checksums
> enabled?  Or more than most, maybe 70%?  80%?  In today's environment,
> I'd probably say that it's more like 90+%.

It would be nice if there were some actual evidence about this, rather
than numbers picked out of the air.

> I agree that it's unfortunate that we haven't put more effort into
> fixing that- I'm all for it, but it's disappointing to see that people
> are not in favor of changing the default as I believe it would both help
> our users and encourage more development of the feature.

I think the really key point is that a whole lot of infrastructure work
needs to be done still, and changing the default before that work has been
done is not going to be user-friendly.  The most pressing issue being the
difficulty of changing the setting after the fact.  It would be a *whole*
lot easier to sell default-on if there were a way to turn it off, and yet
you want us to buy into default-on before that way exists.  Come back
after that feature is in, and we can talk.
        regards, tom lane