Re: State of Beta 2 - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Sean Chittenden
Subject Re: State of Beta 2
Date
Msg-id 20030911212425.GG32016@perrin.nxad.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: State of Beta 2  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: State of Beta 2
List pgsql-general
> > I haven't had a chance to sit down and do any exhaustive testing
> > yet and don't think I will for a while.  That said, once 7.4 goes
> > gold, I'm going to provide databases/postgresql-devel with a
> > tunable that will allow people to choose what block size they
> > would like (4k, 8K, 16K, 32K, or 64K) when they build the port.
>
> If you do this, you *have* to put in a very very big warning that
> databases created with non-PostgreSQL-standard block sizes may not
> be transferrable to a standard-PostgreSQL install ... that is Tom's
> major problem, is cross-platform/system dump/restores may no work is
> the database schema was designed with a 16k block size in mind ...

Agreed, but if anyone has a table with close to 1600 columns in a
table... is either nuts or knows what they're doing.  If someone has
>1600 columns, that is an issue, but isn't one that I think can be
easily fended off without the backend being able to adapt on the fly
to different block sizes, which seems like something that could be
done with a rewrite of some of this code when table spaces are
introduced.

-sc

--
Sean Chittenden

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: "another command is already in progress" error (fwd)
Next
From: "Edwin Quijada"
Date:
Subject: Function to convert