Re: [HACKERS] MAX Query length

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Ansley, Michael" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] MAX Query length
Date: 1999-07-15 13:58:53
Message-ID: 6093.932047133@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Ansley, Michael" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za> writes:
> At present, disk blocks are set to 8k. Is it as easy as just adjusting the
> constant to enlarge this? Testing queries larger than 16k with only an 8k
> tuple size could be challenging.

As of 6.5, it's just a matter of adjusting BLCKSZ in include/config.h,
rebuilding, and re-initdb-ing. The workable sizes are 8k 16k and 32k;
bigger than 32k fails for reasons I don't recall exactly (offsets
stored in signed shorts somewhere, no doubt).

> Is somebody actively working on removing the tuple-length dependence on the
> block size?

There was considerable discussion about it a few weeks ago, but I didn't
hear anyone actually committing to do the work :-(. Maybe when you've
made some progress on the text-length issues, someone will get excited
about the tuple-length issue...

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Louis Bertrand 1999-07-15 14:10:11 Re: [HACKERS] Updated TODO list
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-07-15 13:42:30 Re: [PORTS] RedHat6.0 & Alpha