On Wed, Aug 26, 2026 at 10:29:36AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote: > > 3. Online data checksums (f19c0eccae9, Daniel Gustafsson and Magnus > > Hagander): ~25 substantive fixes, mostly state-machine holes — invalid > > transitions in checkpoints and promotion, initial state missing from > > the control file, basebackup false checksum failures, wrong WAL for > > unlogged relations. A corruption-detection feature producing false > > positives is exactly the wrong failure mode. > > I'm not *too* concerned about this one. In contrast to most of the other > features here it's a super user only feature that you're not going to use > continuously. If it turns out to be too problematic, disabling it is a few > lines.
I was thinking that too. Would the worst case be that people will have to disable and re-enable checksums again. Is that something we could actually give people a workflow for? Seeing anything removed from the major release note will feel painful, but perhaps necessary. -- Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
