| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "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 10:21:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20060304102119.GB29180@svana.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 12:15:46PM +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> 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.
I suppose this would mean that you couldn't use vacuum on the toast
table anymore. Or teach vacuum that everytime it moves a tuple it needs
to update the original table (sequential scan). What exactly are you
trying to save here?
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a
> tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone
> else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-03-04 10:29:41 | Re: Problemas with gram.y |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2006-03-04 10:15:46 | Re: Vertical Partitioning with TOAST |