| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Christensen <david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Initdb-time block size specification |
| Date: | 2023-09-05 14:04:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ7ZCdEmRmiu3Pf-QDqAUehM5ewzj7XKsey6YkCYn=NXQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 3:09 PM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Except that no one is forcing you to actually go 130mph or 32mph, right?
> You make it seem like this patch forces people to use some other page
> size, but that's clearly not what it's doing - it gives you the option
> to use smaller or larger block, if you chose to. Just like increasing
> the speed limit to 130mph doesn't mean you can't keep going 65mph.
>
> The thing is - we *already* allow using different block size, except
> that you have to do custom build. This just makes it easier.
Right. Which is worth doing if it doesn't hurt performance and is
likely to be useful to a lot of people, and is not worth doing if it
will hurt performance and be useful to relatively few people. My bet
is on the latter.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jacktby jacktby | 2023-09-05 14:29:58 | How to add a new pg oid? |
| Previous Message | torikoshia | 2023-09-05 13:58:59 | Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query |