On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 10:03:50AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Montag, 25. September 2006 04:04 schrieb ITAGAKI Takahiro:
> > #shared_buffers = 32000kB       # min 128kB or max_connections*16kB
> > #temp_buffers = 8000kB          # min 800kB
> > #effective_cache_size = 8000kB
> >
> > Are there any reasons to continue to use 1000-unit numbers? Megabyte-unit
> > (32MB and 8MB) seems to be more friendly for users. It increases some
> > amount of values (4000 vs. 4096), but there is little in it.
> The reason with the shared_buffers is that the detection code in initdb has 
> 400kB as minimum value, and it would be pretty complicated to code the 
> detection code to handle both kB and MB units.  If someone wants to try it, 
> though, please go ahead.

What about 0.4MB? Granted, it's uglier than 400kB, but anyone running on
a machine that can't handle at least 1MB is already in the "pretty ugly"
Jim Nasby                                            [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)

---------------------------(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