Re: effective_cache_size is a real?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: effective_cache_size is a real?
Date: 2006-07-24 23:27:45
Message-ID: 44C55771.2080206@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter,

> Is it intentional that effective_cache_size is a real (as opposed to
> integer)? The initial revision of guc.c already has it that way, so it
> was probably blindly adapted from the previous adhockery that had all
> planner variables be doubles.
>

I beleive that it's a real because the other query estimate variables
are reals. Might be worth checking the estimation code to make sure
that changing the type won't break anything.

--Josh

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Satoshi Nagayasu 2006-07-24 23:33:03 Re: pgstattuple extension for indexes
Previous Message Chris Browne 2006-07-24 23:24:54 Help! - Slony-I - saving/setting/restoring GUC