"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> After playing with it for a little bit, I'm not convinced that it buys
> enough performance win to be worth applying --- the restriction of cache
> lifespan to one tuple cycle of a TupleTableSlot is awfully restrictive.
> (For example, sorts that involve toasted sort keys continue to suck,
> because the tuples being sorted aren't in Slots.) It would probably
> fix the specific case that the PostGIS hackers were complaining of,
> but I think we need something more.
> Still, I wanted to get it into the archives because the idea of indirect
> toast pointers might be useful for something else.
I do like that it handles even inline-compressed cases. What I didn't like
about the managed cache was that it couldn't handle such cases. I could easily
imagine the PostGIS case arising for inline compressed data structures. I
wonder if it isn't worthwhile just for that case even if there's a further
cache behind it for repeated fetches of out-of-line data.
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Teodor Sigaev||Date: 2008-06-30 19:05:16|
|Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Fragments in tsearch2 headline|
|Previous:||From: Alex Hunsaker||Date: 2008-06-30 16:10:19|
|Subject: Re: Auto-explain patch|