Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD...
От | Neil Conway |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030829023547.GI63737@home.samurai.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD... (Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bumping block size to 16K on FreeBSD...
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:00:44PM -0700, Sean Chittenden wrote: > Other than you feeling uneasy about the possibility of uncovering bugs > because this hasn't been widely done like this before, do you have any > other concerns, or do you think the possibility of finding bugs very > likely? In case Tom didn't make this clear, I'm strongly opposed to making this change without doing the necessary (non-FreeBSD-specific) legwork. The bottom-line is that if we're going to be changing the block size on a regular basis, it needs to be completely transparent to the user, from a functionality perspective. That's currently not the case: changing the BLCKSZ changes the meaning of shared_buffers and effective_cache_size, for example, so tuning documents written for other operating systems won't apply as easily to PostgreSQL on FreeBSD. Until the user-visible effects of BLCKSZ have been ironed over[1], I definately think you shouldn't include the patch in the FreeBSD port. [1] - Other improvements, like making it easier to change the blocksize (making it a configure option?) would be cooltoo. -Neil
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: