Re: [HACKERS] Large block size problems and notes...

2003-10-02 Thread Tom Lane
Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2) While testing the above, I noted that 65K blocks fail and 32K is as > big as PostgreSQL can handle, for one reason or another. 15-bit offsets in page item ids. > but, it seems as though the test at the bottom of > RelationGetBufferForTuple(): > sho

[HACKERS] Large block size problems and notes...

2003-10-02 Thread Sean Chittenden
Sorry, no benchmark results in this post, but I do have a few notes to pass along for folks: 1) FreeBSD -devel port now has configurable block sizes 2) 65K blocks fail, I think erroneously 3) The size of the postmaster proc and friends explodes to 45MB 4) effective_cache_size is a bad name for a G