On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 09:43:47PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> So I decided to add some support for earlier version in my version of
> the program, and pushed it to https://github.com/credativ/pg_checksums
> if anybody is interested in that. I have to admit that it is quite less
> fancy than your
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:30:30AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:47:29AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:21:29PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> >> Naming it pg_checksums, with only verification as an option, seems to me to
>
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 01:54:13PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I have applied this patch along with the documentation patch from Michael.
Thanks, I saw the commits. That's fine by me.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:47:29AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:21:29PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Naming it pg_checksums, with only verification as an option, seems to me to
>> imply future direction for 12 more than what pg_verify_checksums does. I
>> would
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 15 Apr 2018, at 09:36, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> >> Thinking more on this, I don’t think the -f option should be in the
> tool until
> >> we have the ability
> On 15 Apr 2018, at 09:36, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Thinking more on this, I don’t think the -f option should be in the tool
>> until
>> we have the ability to turn on/off checksums. Since checksums are always on,
>> or al
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Thinking more on this, I don’t think the -f option should be in the tool until
> we have the ability to turn on/off checksums. Since checksums are always on,
> or always off, -f is at best confusing IMO. The attached patch remov
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:21:29PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Right, I misunderstood your initial email but I see what you mean. Yes, you
> are right and with that +1 on your patch.
OK, no problem.
> Naming it pg_checksums, with only verification as an option, seems to me to
> imply futur
> On 11 Apr 2018, at 01:53, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 10 Apr 2018, at 06:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Does it really imply that? Either way, the tool could potentially be useful
>> for debugging a broken cluster so I’m
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Peter, the code does the right thing as it requires the instance's
> control file state to be either DB_SHUTDOWNED_IN_RECOVERY or
> DB_SHUTDOWNED. The documentation, on the contrary, implies that
> the instance just needs to be offline, wh
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27:19PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 10 Apr 2018, at 06:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Does it really imply that? Either way, the tool could potentially be useful
> for debugging a broken cluster so I’m not sure that stating it requires a
> cleanly shut down serv
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:40:58PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I agree with Michael -- shutting down the server using immediate mode
> could lead to torn pages, that crash recovery will need to repair at a
> later stage. I think that some strong caveats around this are required
> in the pg_veri
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 10 Apr 2018, at 06:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> 1) The documentation states that the cluster needs to be offline.
>> Doesn't this imply that the cluster can also be forcibly killed? It
>> seems to me that the documentation ought to
> On 10 Apr 2018, at 06:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
> 1) The documentation states that the cluster needs to be offline.
> Doesn't this imply that the cluster can also be forcibly killed? It
> seems to me that the documentation ought to say that the cluster needs
> to be shut down cleanly instead.
14 matches
Mail list logo
