"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: 
> > Indeed, I've been wondering lately if we shouldn't resurrect 
> > LET_OS_MANAGE_FILESIZE and make that the default on systems with 
> > largefile support.  If nothing else it would cut down on open/close 
> > overhead on very large relations.
> 
> > I'd still put some limit on the filesize, else you cannot manually 
> > distribute a table across spindles anymore. Also some 
> backup solutions 
> > are not too happy with too large files eighter (they have 
> trouble with 
> > staging the backup). I would suggest something like 32 Gb.
> 
> Well, some people would find those arguments compelling and 
> some wouldn't.  We already have a manually configurable 
> RELSEG_SIZE, so people who want a 32Gb or whatever segment 
> size can have it.
> But if you're dealing with terabyte-sized tables that's still 
> a lot of segments.
> 
> What I'd be inclined to do is allow people to set RELSEG_SIZE 
> = 0 in pg_config_manual.h to select the unsegmented option.  
> That way we already have the infrastructure in pg_control etc 
> to ensure that the database layout matches the backend.

That sounds perfect. Still leaves the question of what to default to ?

Another issue is, that we would probably need to detect large file
support of the underlying filesystem, else we might fail at runtime :-(

Andreas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to