| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: request for feedback - read-only GUC variables, pg_settings |
| Date: | 2003-12-06 15:31:36 |
| Message-ID: | 200312061531.hB6FVaj00698@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> > I hate to reply to this because I have already cast my vote, but
> > "block_size" does not report the size of a disk block. It reports the
> > size of a PostgreSQL block/page. Disk blocks are almost always 512
> > bytes in size.
>
> Perhaps then neither "block" nor "page" is best. Perhaps it should be
> "buffer_size" or something like that?
It is really the storage block size, and that is manifest in the buffer
size and disk block size used.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-12-06 15:43:18 | Re: [GENERAL] Transaction Question |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-12-06 15:20:29 | Re: Postgres 7.3.5 and count('x') |