Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: WIP: splitting BLCKSZ

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WIP: splitting BLCKSZ
Date: 2006-04-04 15:05:15
Message-ID: 1144163115.13549.499.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 19:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org> writes:
> > Here's an updated patch with help from Simon.  Once I get a test system
> > going again in the lab I'll start posting some data.  I'm planning a
> > combination of block sizes (BLCKSZ and XLOG_BLCKSZ) and number of WAL
> > buffers.
> 
> Applied with minor corrections (you missed pg_resetxlog, for one).

Thanks. (That omission was mine, not Mark's.)


On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 18:08 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I can't see any very good reason
> why data block size and xlog block size were ever tied together, and I
> think it'll make the code read better if they're separated.

I see you've changed the control file back from XLOG_BLCKSZ to BLCKSZ; I
wasn't sure which one of those to choose. Perhaps that also should be
changed to PGCONTROL_BLCKSZ to more clearly differentiate that also (but
not put it in pg_config_manual.h?

Best Regards, Simon Riggs


In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-04-04 15:13:38
Subject: Re: WIP: splitting BLCKSZ
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2006-04-04 12:22:38
Subject: Re: Suggestion: Which Binary?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group