From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WIP: splitting BLCKSZ |
Date: | 2006-04-03 22:08:24 |
Message-ID: | 17266.1144102104@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
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.
If there's no objection, I'll go ahead and apply the parts of this that
create a separate XLOG_BLCKSZ symbol, but not (yet) the parts that
actually change any parameter values. 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.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-03 23:37:15 | Re: WIP: splitting BLCKSZ |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-04-03 21:44:41 | Re: Suggestion: Which Binary? |