On K, 2005-06-01 at 14:00 +0200, Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
> On 6/1/05, Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You could create a separate bufferpool per page size. Of course that
> > has other disadvantages.
> >
> > Is it really so difficult to create and attach another shmem segme
On 6/1/05, Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could create a separate bufferpool per page size. Of course that
> has other disadvantages.
>
> Is it really so difficult to create and attach another shmem segment ?
Well, I don't think it is much different from having two da
> The problem I see with this proposal is that the buffer manager knows
> how to handle only a equally-sized pages. And the shared memory stuff
> gets sized according to size * num_pages. So what happens if a certain
> tablespace A with pagesize=X gets to have a lot of its pages cached,
> evicti
On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 17:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone had
> > discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at the
> > tablespace level?
>
> Can you produce any evi
Tom,
You and I both know that depending on the application and data,
different block sizes are beneficial. As for actual statistics due to
overhead, I don't know what I can give you.
I can provide stats from an application which fits the case for multiple
block sizes on Oracle, but Oracle a
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 02:55:29PM -0600, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone had
> discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at the
> tablespace level? I know that a change such as this would substant
Yes,
That is what I/my clients have been discussing. It is a nifty
performance feature.
Bricklen Anderson wrote:
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
Hey everyone,
I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone
had discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
Hey everyone,
I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone had
discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at the
tablespace level? I know that a change such as this would substantially
impact buffer operations, transactions, acc
"Jonah H. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone had
> discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at the
> tablespace level?
Can you produce any evidence whatsoever that this could be worth the cost?
Aside from
Hey everyone,
I'm sure this has been thought of but was wondering whether anyone had
discussed the allowance of run-time block size specifications at the
tablespace level? I know that a change such as this would substantially
impact buffer operations, transactions, access methods, the storage
10 matches
Mail list logo