Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?
Date: 2009-01-04 03:47:23
Message-ID: 4960314B.2020502@rhyme.com.au (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> It would be fairly easy, I think, to add some reloption fields that
> would let these parameters be controlled on a per-table level.
> Per-column would be much more painful; do we really need that?
>   

Another +1 on the per-table setting. Or a config file setting to disable
this for the instance.

We have a 200GB DB that is mostly large text (>1MB) that is not searched
with substr. If we see a blowout in size of even 3x, we will not be able
to upgrade due to disk space limitations (at least without paying for a
lot of disks on mirror servers and hot-standy servers).



In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2009-01-04 04:01:15
Subject: Re: generic reloptions improvement
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2009-01-04 03:34:37
Subject: Time to finalize patches for 8.4 beta

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group