* Aidan Van Dyk (ai...@highrise.ca) wrote: > #) Anybody investigated putting the CRC in a relation fork, but not > right in the data block? If the CRC contains a timestamp, and is WAL > logged before the write, at least on reading a block with a wrong > checksum, if a warning is emitted, the timestamp could be looked at by > whoever is reading the warning and know tht the block was written > shortly before the crash $X $PERIODS ago....
I do like the idea of putting the CRC info in a relation fork, if it can
be made to work decently, as we might be able to then support it on a
per-relation basis, and maybe even avoid the on-disk format change..
Of course, I'm sure there's all kinds of problems with that approach,
but it might be worth some thinking about.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
