On 2016-06-29 8:12 AM, Roger Binns wrote:
On 29/06/16 07:51, Dominique Devienne wrote:
I wish for the day SQLite has page checksums to detect any such random
corruption.
Agreed. The SQLite team rejected doing so:
http://www.sqlite.org/src/tktview/72b01a982a84f64d4284
Yes, I know, it's a format change, and will likely slow things down a
little, but it's worth it IMHO.
Note that it isn't as big a change as you think, and could be done
today. SQLite already allows a portion of each page to be used for
other purposes, with the big user being encryption.
I notice that the ticket rejection didn't include any rationale or explanation,
or I didn't find any when I looked. What was the rationale for rejecting that
ticket?
I believe that SQLite having page checksums would be a good idea whose time has
come. Even Postgres on whom SQLite takes a lot of influence has had that
feature for the last 2.5 years.
This should be doable as an optional-per-file feature, like some other features
like foreign keys are optional. If the feature is used, that is a file format
break so older SQLite versions won't attempt to modify a file, and if a file
doesn't use the feature then older SQLite versions will still work with it.
-- Darren Duncan
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
