| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PGC_SIGHUP shared_buffers? |
| Date: | 2024-02-19 18:54:01 |
| Message-ID: | f4ad3382-2240-4776-8e03-d9b4ab1a1302@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/19/24 13:13, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2024-02-19 09:19:16 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
>> Couldn't we scale the rounding, e.g. allow small allocations as we do now,
>> but above some number always round? E.g. maybe >= 2GB round to the nearest
>> 256MB, >= 4GB round to the nearest 512MB, >= 8GB round to the nearest 1GB,
>> etc?
>
> That'd make the translation considerably more expensive. Which is important,
> given how common an operation this is.
Perhaps it is not practical, doesn't help, or maybe I misunderstand, but
my intent was that the rounding be done/enforced when setting the GUC
value which surely cannot be that often.
--
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2024-02-19 19:32:19 | Re: Proposal: Adjacent B-Tree index |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-02-19 18:13:09 | Re: PGC_SIGHUP shared_buffers? |