Re: Configuring BLCKSZ and XLOGSEGSZ (in 8.3)
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Configuring BLCKSZ and XLOGSEGSZ (in 8.3) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 24656.1164664077@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Configuring BLCKSZ and XLOGSEGSZ (in 8.3) (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Configuring BLCKSZ and XLOGSEGSZ (in 8.3)
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> I don't doubt that there may be a positive effect from increasing the
> block size. But we haven't seen any analysis of why that might be.
It seems at least as likely that increased block size would *decrease*
performance by requiring even small writes to do more physical I/O.
This applies to both data files and xlog.
But the real issue here is whether there are grounds for supporting
run-time changes in the block size. AFAICS the evidence for supporting
even compile-time changes is pretty weak; why should we take the likely
complexity and performance costs of making it run-time changeable?
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: