Re: Article on MySQL vs. Postgres

From: "Michael Mayo" <michael-a-mayo(at)worldnet(dot)att(dot)net>
To: "Tim Perdue" <tperdue(at)valinux(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Article on MySQL vs. Postgres
Date: 2000-07-05 04:50:06
Message-ID: 003f01bfe63c$b94200c0$cb324f0c@nobody
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Perdue" <tperdue(at)valinux(dot)com>

> Before I do that I want to confirm the major problem I had w/postgres:
> the 8K tuple limit.

Just wanted to point out that this is not *exactly* true. While the
default limit is 8k, all that is required to change it to 32k is to change
one line of text in config.h (blcksz from 8k to 32k). This is pointed out
in the FAQ. So I would really consider the *default* to be 8k and the
*limit* to be 32k. IMHO 32k is good enough for 99% of tuples in a typical
bulletin-board-like application. It is not unreasonable to reject posts >
32k in size. Though you might want to evaluate performance using the 32k
tuples; might increase or decrease depending on application.

-Mike

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Philip Warner 2000-07-05 05:00:08 Re: [HACKERS] Re: Revised Copyright: is this morepalatable?
Previous Message Philip Warner 2000-07-05 04:40:43 Re: [HACKERS] Revised Copyright: is this more palatable?