Re: Has anybody think about changing BLCKSZ to an option of initdb?

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:

> On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 13:53 +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 01:29:43PM +0000, Greg Stark wrote:
>> > The main advantage would be for circumstances such as the Windows
>> > installer where users are installing precompiled binaries. They don't
>> > get an opportunity to choose the block size at all. (Similarly for
>> > users of binary-only commercial products such as EDB's but the Windows
>> > installer makes a pretty good argument on its own).
>>
>> And all the linux distributions which ship precompiled binaries. I'm
>> sure there are people who compile postgres themselves but I think there
>> are more who don't.
>
> I think that is an understatement. I would say 99% of postgresql users
> do NOT compile from source. Heck the only time I compile from source is
> when I need to fix mis-configured defaults in RH packages (which is why
> we now have rpms that fix those defaults) or when we have back patched
> something for a customer.

So has anyone here done any experiments with live systems with different block
sizes? What were your experiences?

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!