Re: [HACKERS] Problems with >2GB tables on Linux 2.0

Peter T Mount <peter@retep.org.uk> writes:
>> I just did a checkout of the cvs code, hardcoded RELSEG_SIZE to 243968,
>> and it works beautifully now!

> Problem here is that RELSEG_SIZE is dependent on the block size. Seeing we
> can increase the block size from 8k, this would break.

Of course it should really be defined as

#define RELSEG_SIZE        (2000000000 / BLCKSZ)

for some suitable magic constant.
        regards, tom lane