Re: [HACKERS] Disk block size issues.
От | darrenk@insightdist.com (Darren King) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Disk block size issues. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9801092224.AA46582@ceodev обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Could the block size be made into a command line option, like "-k 8192"? > > > > Too scary for me. > > I kinda like this one...if it can be relatively implimented. The main > reason I like it is that, like -B and -S, it means that someone could deal > with "tweaking" a system without having to recompile from scratch... > > That said, I'd much rather that -k option being something that is > an option only available when *creating* the database (ie. initdb) with a > pg_blocksize file being created and checked when postmaster starts up. > > Essentially, make '-k 8192' an option only available to the postgres > process, not the postmaster process. And not settable by the -O option to > postmaster... > > > Yes, we could do that, but if they ever start the postmaster with a > > different value, he is lost. > > See above...it should only be something that is settable at initdb time, > not accessible via 'postmaster' itself... This is a pretty reasonable restriction, but... The major change would be like Bruce has stated earlier, the variables that are declared with the #define value would have to be made into pointers and palloc'd/pfree'd as necessary. Could get pretty ugly in files like nbtsort.c with double-dereferenced pointers and all. I'll make a list of these variables this weekend and come with a more definate opinion on the subject. darrenk
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: