On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 10:54:50AM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > (I may have said this before, but) My overall high-level impression of this > patch is that it's really cmmplex for a feature that you use maybe once in > the lifetime of a cluster. I'm happy to review but I'm not planning to > commit this myself. I don't object if some other committer picks this up > (Magnus?).
I was just looking at the latest patch set as a matter of curiosity, and I have a shared feeling. I think that this is a lot of complication in-core for what would be a one-time operation, particularly knowing that there are other ways to do it already with the offline checksum tool, even if that is more costly: - Involve logical replication after initializing the new instance with --data-checksums, or in an upgrade scenatio with pg_upgrade. - Involve physical replication: stop the standby cleanly, enable checksums on it and do a switchover. Another thing we could do is to improve pg_checksums with a parallel mode. The main design question would be how to distribute the I/O, and that would mean balancing at least across tablespaces. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
