Re: XIDs and big boxes again ...

Gregory Stark <stark@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> ... Keep in mind you're proposing to make everything run 3% slower
instead of
> using that 3% i/o bandwidth headroom to run vacuum outside the critical
path.

I think that's actually understating the problem.  Assuming this is a
64-bit machine (which it had better be, if you want XID to be 64 bits...)
then the effective increase in tuple header size is not just 12 bytes
but 16 bytes, due to alignment padding.  Greg's 3% overhead number is
only on-target if your average row width is presently about 530 bytes.
It could easily be a whole lot less than that, and the overhead
pro****tionally higher.

			regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers