Re: New CRC algorithm: Slicing by 8 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: New CRC algorithm: Slicing by 8
Date
Msg-id 453D0FE0.8040101@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: New CRC algorithm: Slicing by 8  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> In most cases, it would be foolish to avoid: but there are cases where
> the data is CRC checked by the hardware/system already, so I'd like to
> make an option to turn this off, defaulting to on, for safety.

How would we know? What are those cases?

Sounds like a foot gun to me.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

> 
>> You may as well propose not writing WAL
>> at all (and no, I don't think it'd pass).
> 
> That would undo all of my efforts, so no I wouldn't consider that.
> 


-- 
  === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240  Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL
solutionssince 1997            http://www.commandprompt.com/
 

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Simon Riggs"
Date:
Subject: Re: New CRC algorithm: Slicing by 8
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] smartvacuum() instead of autovacuum