Thread: Minor accuracy issue

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/limits.html
Description:

Under page "https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/limits.html", it is
mentioned:

relation size - 32TB
rows per table - limited by the number of tuples that can fit onto
4,294,967,295 pages


32 TB is 35,184,372,088,832 bytes (32*1024*1024*1024*1024).
When we divide this by 8192, we get 4,294,967,296.

So why limit is mentioned 4,294,967,295 pages, instead of 4,294,967,296
pages ?

On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 at 20:23, PG Doc comments form
<noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
> Under page "https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/limits.html", it is
> mentioned:
>
> relation size - 32TB
> rows per table - limited by the number of tuples that can fit onto
> 4,294,967,295 pages
>
>
> 32 TB is 35,184,372,088,832 bytes (32*1024*1024*1024*1024).
> When we divide this by 8192, we get 4,294,967,296.
>
> So why limit is mentioned 4,294,967,295 pages, instead of 4,294,967,296
> pages ?

Because that's the limit.

It might be more accurate to say the relation size limit is
34359738360 kB, but do you think it's going to be better to write
that?

David