Re: [HACKERS] My 2c on adjustable blocksizes
От | Thomas G. Lockhart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] My 2c on adjustable blocksizes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 34B1B66E.97F90475@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | My 2c on adjustable blocksizes (Integration <abrams@philos.umass.edu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> I would like to stand up as being very much in favor of two related things: > > (1) adjustable blocksizes > (2) a larger MAX TUPLE size > > As far as I can tell (and that ain't far), there would only be relatively > minor changes that would have to be made to give the option of allowing > the user to select 2, 4, 8 or 16 as the blocksize. Concurrently, it > would seem wise to simply up the max tuple size to 32k. It seems to me > unlikely that this would have a noticeable performance impact. In order > to do this, we would need to know about the 32 bit ItemIdData structure in > /storage/itemid.h (see my previous posts). It was recommended to me that > lp_flags might still be only using 2 of the 6 bits allocated to it. If > so, increasing lp_offset to 15 and lp_len to 15, i.e. 2^15 bits, i.e. > 32768 bytes max tuple size, would be possible! I think! If someone came up with some clean patches to allow #define declarations for block size and for tuple sizes, I'm sure they would be of interest. The ongoing work being discussed for v6.3 would not conflict with those areas (I suspect) so go to it! I have noticed some integer constants scattered around the code (in places where they don't belong) which are related to a maximum tuple size. For example, there is an arbitrary 4096 byte limit on the size of a character column, and the 4096 is hardcoded into the parser. That particular one would be easy to change... - Tom
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: