| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: TOAST usage setting |
| Date: | 2007-06-08 05:39:58 |
| Message-ID: | 87hcpjdmxd.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Gregory Stark wrote:
>>
>> Is this still testing with all data fitting in RAM?
>
> Yes. Having things out of RAM is going to make access even slower, but
> it is going to allow the heap to be in RAM more often.
It would let us measure the actual impact of TOAST. The largest negative
effect of which is to destroy the sequential access pattern and the positive
effect is as you say to increase the cache effectiveness on non-toasted data.
The cpu costs are insignificant so testing in-memory cases misses the point.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paesold | 2007-06-08 07:54:09 | Re: Autovacuum launcher doesn't notice death of postmaster immediately |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-06-08 03:09:24 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid losing track of data for shared tables in pgstats. |