Re: Build sizes vs docs

2009/12/7 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> Came cross this when updating the cvs fix. We declare size requirements as:
>>    Also check that you have sufficient disk space. You will need about
>>    65 MB for the source tree during compilation and about  MB for
>>    the installation directory. An empty database cluster takes about
>>    25 MB; databases take about five times the amount of space that a
>>    flat text file with the same data would take. If you are going to
>>    run the regression tests you will temporarily need up to an extra
>>    90 MB. Use the <command>df</command> command to check free disk
>
>> My source *without* compile is 82 Mb, and with a build in it (linux
>> i686) is 110Mb during compilations, rather than 65.
>> An empty cluster takes about 33Mb.
>> The regression database takes about 132Mb.
>> (this is 8.4)
>
>> Should we fix these numbers, or just remove them? They're clearly
>> platform dependent, but perhaps there's still a point in including
>> them - mainly as hints?
>
> Maybe round them off to an order of magnitude.  I think it's useful
> to have some idea of the size requirements, even if they change over
> time.  It wouldn't be a bad idea to say "as of 8.4" or some such, too.

Hmm, I don't like that, it'll just make things look old :-) For now
I've applied a patch to update the values with what it is now.

Perhaps we should just add it to the release checklist to verify that
they are reasonably correct? Shouldn't take too long, and it's not
likely it'll ever change in a minor release - only major releases are
interesting.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/