Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([2a02:16a8:dc51::56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fvtqr-0007DY-JX for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 00:33:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fvtqp-00050Y-Re for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 00:33:19 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fvtqp-00050R-16 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 00:33:19 +0000 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fvtqj-0005eT-8s for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 00:33:18 +0000 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD6E821C5E; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 20:33:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 31 Aug 2018 20:33:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paquier.xyz; h= cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; bh=4fp4nCOGvUWaLgT1gGBSUZYlDUICn+tzYwpP/x2a5Ek=; b=5eX6Lw5V OKomSPOEOhgDdhJana01F/gZlB8AhP54nfDjZuejxYpKnhhVX3iB5rkDLJ/cUKba DR5voqgnVmVsFpYCgCdw5ZsiKvG7fs07Au75A6q1N5LSI286qAKYJHhud7q/BXDg SX/bhi6qNcA66BHjQIC5JG56BK9Ucc4gyptvwIZP2aV4loXrXtp4wiU5UzRcAsGf chDpdNMgsN0Pv4UkkPvNKxmgVmZCFgnemZxkiDU3lqeOp/K1YNgQ9tSwSIuO6/Yr 4MNmIPU8nChrqsohT+++tGW//ax/Aya91zNWk2X+TwHWthhBrQ6orCOpwene6Bpt pPul+2VQ+1AWUw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=4fp4nCOGvUWaLgT1gGBSUZYlDUICn +tzYwpP/x2a5Ek=; b=TEbkBVLiW9t+cqTBtSYfaWr5TsrBy7f77kfqpbPtgcEc6 WP1nml86RcyOzcI9v0fBD2cAkRxfgV7QBfgZic+nLcPN8gqroM4fNcFATjXlFw5a kFq6BFfvzwfD9cqoHsK87xY8kRzDwCid5BLTLaVXUnl7I7jD9fE/mcDbZpudihlv jihT9gLZTs/ylwGT+/IhPpOlh1JhgNFjO41e7J1BsXcmPK0ACNmZWqQnrRXBSpew UEUfiaIdbjbSVyckmtaKrK19SA7K3i0mTJ6+Xb/an9XQhZbh16CpHyTfi+XV2kwU EJqqHBAx5O/h+X2ch7+W9oyeFk5MYoqVKjACK2vXw== X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: Received: from paquier.xyz (unknown [208.91.3.26]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CB4BDE455C; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 20:33:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:33:03 -0700 From: Michael Paquier To: Tom Lane Cc: Fabien COELHO , Michael Banck , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: pg_verify_checksums and -fno-strict-aliasing Message-ID: <20180901003303.GE5305@paquier.xyz> References: <1535618100.1286.3.camel@credativ.de> <7321.1535639966@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20180830175652.GC15446@paquier.xyz> <12123.1535672257@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20180831000600.GI15446@paquier.xyz> <28226.1535727306@sss.pgh.pa.us> <21037.1535745351@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20180831222119.GD5305@paquier.xyz> <15258.1535759998@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="f61P+fpdnY2FZS1u" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15258.1535759998@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --f61P+fpdnY2FZS1u Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 07:59:58PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > The others you mention could be changed, probably, but I didn't > bother as they didn't seem performance-critical. It is not really critical indeed. There is an argument to change them so as other folks get used to it though. > (I also wondered whether to use "WAL" instead of "XLog" in that > struct name, but it seems like we've mostly stuck with "xlog" > in internal C names.) XLOG_BLCKSZ is used, which makes me think that XLog is better than WAL here. A matter of taste of course. -- Michael --f61P+fpdnY2FZS1u Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAluJ3j4ACgkQnvQgOdby QH0NXg//cYs/6LxuQP0a963Si8qZB0eDlPnrc+78YP9Fgbl/sq0mvtoFYsvtIUpE BhDFU8UmxfdfK07dg5/o3j8FQ8Mtod+j9heClIgfYD7kt58ex98vA7ChyBKnSZGQ alQOhJxBj7/5w4Z3+CDIZbQmDLhWvrO9oGVezls3Jxj9QgNdxF7IpyEYhellnsaZ QXO0gni4jLbq9Wf6yTg3tICbvlqsFyUXdI0/+O6nPfycxUKZNWhe7FeS2hHaA6rR pHP32bnxNM7zTIYdASek7wMtDZ5edO9xgMS46hE6MmYRXODtf1mK8B2UsDiwAqCs +igDNSAvXCmlzv8+aBLn2F4QCdy90gTYVb0WyuZ+A55+smzdW5PpmMr1MStc87Ao kZYCGRNkM/CnZq8GjQJG/IOjcdHocvXMWCrwdEVG9UTohlgZj/mobS22rLbpAPSU IHWQeiwy5LIxAoTJY6H/5ZbPZ5bOcmh29Bc47M3fRVuiBFgG90UE/J5lHahiYxvL wrnb9ThnjK893NZKMjluLJMuZdyQ3XppveXZg1h6M/QaeScl4G6mPxNgKt6VO4L2 Ql+dSMnvx7yYpOrT6/LI0F5U2M45LXCnFzd37frgSWi3yYoDHHuUtXEBxN6CCY4m Obii2tm20jC3B+9Ie509Qa2Q15BmIk9xbZLtDT02BSycRHdJknk= =Zz0B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --f61P+fpdnY2FZS1u--