> On 19 Aug 2026, at 09:49, Fujii Masao <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 7:13 AM Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 18 Aug 2026, at 11:55, Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >> >>> I don't have more comments, LGTM. >> >> Thanks for review, pushed and backpatched. > > Thanks for working on this! > > + /* > + * Data checksum state at cluster initialization. Since the state can be > + * changed during runtime, we need to store the initial value for system > + * functions which report initdb settings. > + */ > + uint32 data_checksum_version_init; > > Do we really need to store this value in pg_control? I wonder how useful > it would be to users. > > If data_checksum_version_init is needed only for > pg_control_init().data_page_checksum_version, I'm inclined to think > it isn't worth adding it to pg_control. In that case, > pg_control_init().data_page_checksum_version would also be of little use, > and I think it would be better to remove it rather than change > the meaning of its value. > > Instead, how about removing pg_control_init().data_page_checksum_version, > adding a new function such as pg_control_state(), and having it return > the current data_checksum_version? Isn't that be simpler and less confusing?
I don't disagree with this, but I also don't think between beta3 and rc1 is a good time to remove fields (which have been there for a very long time) from system info functions. Revisiting this during v20 and cleaning it up seems like a very good idea though. -- Daniel Gustafsson
