Re: Initdb-time block size specification

From: David Christensen <david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Initdb-time block size specification
Date: 2023-09-05 20:57:06
Message-ID: CAOxo6XLr97Hx9q3fg1XvRvSVNZ9fh1DDXt7D_aGOF3OLXRje9A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 2:52 PM Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Something I also asked at this years Unconference - Do we currently
> have Build Farm animals testing with different page sizes ?
>
> I'd say that testing all sizes from 4KB up (so 4, 8, 16, 32) should be
> done at least before each release if not continuously.
>
> -- Cheers
>
> Hannu

The regression tests currently have a lot of breakage when running
against non-standard block sizes, so I would assume the answer here is
no. I would expect that we will want to add regression test variants
or otherwise normalize results so they will work with differing block
sizes, but have not done that yet.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Smith 2023-09-05 21:02:21 Re: Add 'worker_type' to pg_stat_subscription
Previous Message Tristan Partin 2023-09-05 20:38:38 Fix some wording in WAL docs