| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Junji TERAMOTO <teramoto(dot)junji(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Vertical Partitioning with TOAST |
| Date: | 2006-03-04 10:15:46 |
| Message-ID: | 1141467346.3772.2.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ühel kenal päeval, N, 2006-03-02 kell 22:15, kirjutas Bruce Momjian:
> Is there still interst in this idea for TODO?
Just to voice my support - Yes, I think that being able to set lower
thresolds for TOAST is very useful in several cases.
Also getting rid of toast index and start using ctids directly would be
a big bonus.
When using direct ctids we could use either ctid chains or some sort of
skiplist for access to N-th TOAST chunk.
------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-03-04 10:21:19 | Re: Vertical Partitioning with TOAST |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-03-04 10:03:47 | problem with large maintenance_work_mem settings and CREATE INDEX |