Re: Does larger i/o size make sense? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fabien COELHO
Subject Re: Does larger i/o size make sense?
Date
Msg-id alpine.DEB.2.02.1308231107040.3533@localhost6.localdomain6
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Does larger i/o size make sense?  (Kohei KaiGai <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
>> Would it make sense to have something easier to configure that recompiling
>> postgresql and managing a custom executable, say a block size that could be
>> configured from initdb and/or postmaster.conf, or maybe per-object settings
>> specified at creation time?
>>
> I love the idea of per-object block size setting according to expected workload;

My 0.02€: wait to see whether the idea get some positive feedback by core 
people before investing any time in that...

The per object would be a lot of work. A per initdb (so per cluster) 
setting (block size, wal size...) would much easier to implement, but it 
impacts for storage format.

> large tables, larger block size may have less pain than interruption per 8KB
> boundary to switch the block being currently focused on, even though random
> access via index scan loves smaller block size.

Yep, as Tom noted, this is really workload specific.

-- 
Fabien.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Marko Tiikkaja
Date:
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL, RAISE and error context
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL, RAISE and error context