"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Indeed, I've been wondering lately if we shouldn't resurrect > > LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE and make that the default on systems with > > largefile support. If nothing else it would cut down on open/close > > overhead on very large relations. > > > I'd still put some limit on the filesize, else you cannot manually > > distribute a table across spindles anymore. Also some > backup solutions > > are not too happy with too large files eighter (they have > trouble with > > staging the backup). I would suggest something like 32 Gb. > > Well, some people would find those arguments compelling and > some wouldn't. We already have a manually configurable > RELSEG_SIZE, so people who want a 32Gb or whatever segment > size can have it. > But if you're dealing with terabyte-sized tables that's still > a lot of segments. > > What I'd be inclined to do is allow people to set RELSEG_SIZE > = 0 in pg_config_manual.h to select the unsegmented option. > That way we already have the infrastructure in pg_control etc > to ensure that the database layout matches the backend.
That sounds perfect. Still leaves the question of what to default to ? Another issue is, that we would probably need to detect large file support of the underlying filesystem, else we might fail at runtime :-( Andreas ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly