| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Converting postgresql.conf parameters to kilobytes |
| Date: | 2004-06-01 03:42:29 |
| Message-ID: | 87aczo7xlm.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > So I disagree with the premise. Measuring these things in KB is not an
> > improvement.
>
> I agree, although I think changing effective_cache_size to be measured in KB/MB
> is worth doing.
I have to say as a user the parameters that are measured in postgres blocks
are really annoying and confusing. Really really annoying and confusing.
If someone's playing with this I would suggest they should work something like
dd parameters and take a unit. So you could specify effective_cache=500k or
effective_cache=1M or effective_cache=1G or whatever unit you wanted.
And this should be true for _all_ parameters that measure space. Consistency
makes it much much easier for people to learn a new system.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2004-06-01 03:44:25 | Nesting level in protocol? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-01 02:25:28 | Re: Official Freeze Date for 7.5: July 1st, 2004 |