Re: BLCKSZ

Ron wrote:
> In general, and in a very fuzzy sense, "bigger is better".  pg files are
> laid down in 1GB chunks, so there's probably one limitation.

Hm, expect result of tests on other platforms, but if there theoretical
dispute...
I can't undestand why "bigger is better". For instance in search by
index. Index point to page and I need load page to get one row. Thus I
load 8kb from disk for every raw. And keep it then in cache. You
recommend 64kb. With your recomendation I'll get 8 times more IO
throughput, 8 time more head seek on disk, 8 time more memory cache (OS
cache and postgresql) become busy. I have small row in often loaded
table, 32 bytes. Table is not clustered, used several indices. And you
recommend load 64Kb when I need only 32b, isn't it?
--
Olleg