Tom Lane wrote:
> Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar@frodo.hserus.net> writes:
> > Right now following are measured in pages
> > wal_buffers
> > shared_buffers
> > effective_cachesize
> > while rest of the memory parameters are in kb. I thought being uniform would
> > be good. Besides it will make it independent of page size as well.
>
> It would probably be reasonable to change effective_cache_size, since we
> really do not know what the kernel's unit of buffering is (except on
> Linux, where we *do* know that it ain't 8K ;-)). Personally I'd opt for
> measuring it in MB not KB, though; that would be a much more convenient
> unit on modern machines. We could easily make it a float for anyone who
> thinks they know the cache size to sub-MB accuracy.
I thought the idea was that you could put 'm', 'k', or maybe 'p' after
the value to specify the units.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
