Re: [HACKERS] Block Sizes
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Block Sizes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199801061518.KAA20766@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Block Sizes (darrenk@insightdist.com (Darren King)) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> > > > > How hard would it be for postgresql to support adjustable block sizes? > > Just wondering. > > > > I can take a stab at this tonite after work now that the snapshot is there. > Still have around some of the files/diffs from looking at this a year ago... > > I don't think it will be hard, just a few files with BLCKSZ/MAXBLCKSZ > references to check for breakage. Appears that only one bit of lp_flags is > being used too, so that would seem to allow up to 32k blocks. > > Other issue is the bit alignment in the ItemIdData structure. In the past, > I've read that bit operations were slower than int ops. Is this the case? Usually, yes. > > I want to check to see if the structure is only 32 bits and not being padded > by the compiler. Worse to worse, make one field of 32 bits and make macros > to access the three pieces or make lp_off & lp_len shorts and lp_flags a char. > > I can check the aix compiler, but what does gcc and other compilers do with > bit field alignment? I don't know. -- Bruce Momjian maillist@candle.pha.pa.us
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: