From: | Thomas Swan <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |
Date: | 2003-08-28 20:09:24 |
Message-ID: | 3F4E6174.8090102@idigx.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> writes:
>
>
>>Are there any objections
>>to me increasing the block size for FreeBSD installations to 16K for
>>the upcoming 7.4 release?
>>
>>
>
>I'm a little uncomfortable with introducing a cross-platform variation
>in the standard block size. That would have implications for things
>like whether a table definition that works on FreeBSD could be expected
>to work elsewhere; to say nothing of recommendations for shared_buffer
>settings and suchlike.
>
>Also, there is no infrastructure for adjusting BLCKSZ automatically at
>configure time, and I don't much want to add it.
>
>
Has anyone looked at changing the default block size across the board
and what the performance improvements/penalties might be? Hardware has
changed quite a bit over the years.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2003-08-28 20:16:07 | Re: New array functions |
Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-08-28 20:00:44 | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |