On 12 April 2013 23:21, Ants Aasma <a...@cybertec.at> wrote: >> In general, we have more flexibility with WAL because there is no >> upgrade issue. It would be nice to share code with the data page >> checksum algorithm; but really we should just use whatever offers the >> best trade-off in terms of complexity, performance, and error detection >> rate. >> >> I don't think we need to decide all of this right now. Personally, I'm >> satisfied having SIMD checksums on data pages now and leaving WAL >> optimization until later. > > +1
OK, lets drop that idea then. SIMD checksums for 16-bit page checksums only in this release. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
