Re: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0

Thus spake Tom Lane
> I'd suggest setting the limit a good deal less than 2Gb to avoid any
> risk of arithmetic overflow.  Maybe 200000 8K blocks, instead of 262144.

Why not make it substantially lower by default?  Makes it easier to split
a database across spindles.  Even better, how about putting extra extents
into different directories like data/base.1, data/base.2, etc?  Then as
the database grows you can add drives, move the extents into them and
mount the new drives.  The software doesn't even notice the change.

Just a thought.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.