Re: [HACKERS] 8192 BLCKSZ ?

[Tom Samplonius]

On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, mlw wrote:

> This is just a curiosity.
> 
> Why is the default postgres block size 8192? These days, with caching
> file systems, high speed DMA disks, hundreds of megabytes of RAM, maybe
> even gigabytes. Surely, 8K is inefficient.

  I think it is a pretty wild assumption to say that 32k is more efficient
than 8k.  Considering how blocks are used, 32k may be in fact quite a bit
slower than 8k blocks.


Tom