On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 22:55 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Is it intentional that effective_cache_size is a real (as opposed to 
> integer)?  The initial revision of guc.c already has it that way, so it 
> was probably blindly adapted from the previous adhockery that had all 
> planner variables be doubles.

Makes no sense to me as a real. It should be an integer, since it is the
effective number of cache pages, not KB, MB or GB.

  Simon Riggs             
  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to