On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 03:47:34PM -0700, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
> Data checksums are a hard requirement across the entire RDS PostgreSQL
> fleet - we do not allow it to be disabled in RDS. I've definitely seen a
> lot of hard evidence (for example, customer cases I've personally been
> involved i
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 4:23 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > And FWIW, I do think we should change the default. And maybe spend some
> > extra effort on the message coming out of pg_upgrade in this case to make
> > it clear to people what their options are and exactly what to do
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:23:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> And FWIW, I do think we should change the default. And maybe spend some
>> extra effort on the message coming out of pg_upgrade in this case to make
>> it clear to people what their options are and exactly what
Magnus Hagander writes:
> And FWIW, I do think we should change the default. And maybe spend some
> extra effort on the message coming out of pg_upgrade in this case to make
> it clear to people what their options are and exactly what to do.
Is there any hard evidence of checksums catching proble
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 8:05 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:37:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > There's definitely a lot of reasons to want to have the ability to
> > change an existing cluster. Considering the complications around
> > running pg_upgrade already, I do
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:37:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> There's definitely a lot of reasons to want to have the ability to
> change an existing cluster. Considering the complications around
> running pg_upgrade already, I don't really think that changing the
> default of initdb would be t
Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 11:54:34AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * BGoebel (b.goe...@prisma-computer.de) wrote:
> > > initdb --data-checksums "... help to detect corruption by the I/O system"
> > > There is an (negligible?) impact on perform
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 11:54:34AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> * BGoebel (b.goe...@prisma-computer.de) wrote:
> > initdb --data-checksums "... help to detect corruption by the I/O system"
> > There is an (negligible?) impact on performance, ok.
> >
> > Is there another reason N
Greetings,
* BGoebel (b.goe...@prisma-computer.de) wrote:
> initdb --data-checksums "... help to detect corruption by the I/O system"
> There is an (negligible?) impact on performance, ok.
>
> Is there another reason NOT to use this feature ?
Not in my view.
> Has anyone had good or bad exper
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 08:10:13AM -0700, BGoebel wrote:
> initdb --data-checksums "... help to detect corruption by the I/O system"
> There is an (negligible?) impact on performance, ok.
>
> Is there another reason NOT to use this feature ?
> Has anyone had good or bad experience with the use o
initdb --data-checksums "... help to detect corruption by the I/O system"
There is an (negligible?) impact on performance, ok.
Is there another reason NOT to use this feature ?
Has anyone had good or bad experience with the use of --data-checksums?
Thanks in advance!
Bernhard
--
Sent from:
11 matches
Mail list logo