Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 06:59:10 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
	Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, rmt@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Trying to break online checksums with LLMs
Message-ID: <aqkzDnDseqhLpejB@nathan>
References: <E15AC050-C4B5-488D-BB2D-3C7AC9F89EA8@yesql.se>
 <CA+TgmoaOCdjAjr240e_+xoqQCRmLC9MFn3kZOu-7j8w8HBrd8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <2F197F99-9142-481D-8DC9-37FAAF09EC7D@yesql.se>
 <CA+TgmoZiqihva4Udk5+nzOOjOSZnqv1HAjS5=KHoEc9_FL=X=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <110EE07B-5BD9-4AF3-A6DD-F396878F25FC@yesql.se>
 <CA+Tgmob=4k+TGmpDn9Tquk7T1ksRRDiqEVwdi4=HtzgzqSH53A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2E653E01-2059-4536-9E8F-FF15B956C4F7@yesql.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2E653E01-2059-4536-9E8F-FF15B956C4F7@yesql.se>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aqkzDnDseqhLpejB%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 14, 2026 at 11:59:15PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> But at any rate, this is clearly not the time to design that.
> 
> If we revert we should keep online checksums in master and only pull it out of
> 19, to allow for this to be fixed early in 20, and avoid the churn.  I held off
> from backpatching the open item fix for this very reason; unless I hear
> otherwise by Wednesday I'll go ahead with the revert, else the backpatch.
> Adding RMT to the thread to keep everyone in the loop.

Thanks for the heads up.  Based on the discussion, it sounds like reverting
is the right call, unfortunately.

-- 
nathan