X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 296139DCAEC for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 01:51:18 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 44118-08 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 01:51:17 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3DE9DCCC6 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 01:51:15 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jB65pD5O026214; Tue, 6 Dec 2005 00:51:13 -0500 (EST) To: Ron cc: Olleg , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: BLCKSZ In-reply-to: <6.2.5.6.0.20051205183120.01dd6a80@earthlink.net> References: <29518.1133794958@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4394B1D3.7000304@mail.ru> <6.2.5.6.0.20051205183120.01dd6a80@earthlink.net> Comments: In-reply-to Ron message dated "Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:21:21 -0500" Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 00:51:13 -0500 Message-ID: <26213.1133848273@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.003] X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200512/142 X-Sequence-Number: 15963 Ron writes: > Where? BLCKSZ as large as 64KB has been shown to improve > performance. Not in the Postgres context, because you can't set BLCKSZ higher than 32K without doing extensive surgery on the page item pointer layout. If anyone's actually gone to that much trouble, they sure didn't publicize their results ... >> Postgresql 7.4.8. Server dual Opteron 240, 4Gb RAM. > _Especially_ with that HW, upgrade to at least 8.0.x ASAP. It's a > good idea to not be running pg 7.x anymore anyway, but it's > particularly so if you are running 64b SMP boxes. I agree with this bit --- 8.1 is a significant improvement on any prior version for SMP boxes. It's likely that 8.2 will be better yet, because this is an area we just recently started paying serious attention to. regards, tom lane