Re: request for feedback - read-only GUC variables,
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: request for feedback - read-only GUC variables, |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200312041203.hB4C3Nn14787@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: request for feedback - read-only GUC variables, ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: request for feedback - read-only GUC variables,
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > block_size - int > > Shows size of a disk block > > integer_datetimes - bool > > Datetimes are integer based > > max_function_args - int > > Shows the maximum number of function arguments > > max_identifier_length - int > > Shows the maximum identifier length > > max_index_keys - int > > Shows the maximum number of index keys > > > > The main open question at this point is the name for the "block_size" > > variable. Peter favors "block_size", Bruce favors "page_size", Tom > > hasn't taken a position on that specific issue. Does anyone have and > > opinion on the variable name, or any general comments before I commit this? > > PAGE_SIZE generally refers to memory allocations, no? > > I'd go with block_size ... True, page size usually references virtual memory pages, so it is related to virtual memory mapping. Block size is much more related to on-disk storage, true. The only reason I was leaning toward page is that it is possible to confuse disk block (512 bytes) with a PostgreSQL block (8k), but maybe that is not relivant. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: