Excerpts from Stephen Frost's message of lun dic 19 11:18:21 -0300 2011: > * 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.
I think the main objection to that idea was that if you lose a single page of CRCs you have hundreds of data pages which no longer have good CRCs. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
