Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Business cases

From: Tom <tom(at)sdf(dot)com>
To: Darren King <darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [QUESTIONS] Business cases
Date: 1998-01-18 02:10:08
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.3.95q.980117180526.471B-100000@misery.sdf.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, Darren King wrote:

> 16GB?!? Not unless your tuples are 8k. The 8k is/was the max _tuple_ size,
> but more than one tuple can be stored per block. :)
>
> Try the formula in the FAQ to get a reasonable estimate for the table's size.

The sentence "Tuples do not cross 8k boundaries so a 5k tuple will
require 8k of storage" in 3.8 of the FAQ confused me. I did not realize
that multiple tuples could be stored in a page. So I took it to mean
that one tuple was stored in page. I didn't even even see 3.26, because I
thought that 3.8 answered my question :(

Tom

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 1998-01-18 02:35:52 More on free() bug...
Previous Message The Hermit Hacker 1998-01-18 01:55:25 free() error in current source tree under FreeBSD...