From: | Carsten Kropf <ckropf2(at)fh-hof(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: TOAST issue on custom index access method |
Date: | 2010-06-24 15:36:51 |
Message-ID: | 07A391C6-AE33-4541-B51E-CE581DDEED36@fh-hof.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hmm,
k, then I don't know exactly what happens. I have some values in my composite type. The size of the index tuple (if coming from one table and being copied to the target table) is about 15x bytes. Otherwise, if I insert the same tuple directly, it is about 12kb. So, I don't know exactly what happens here, unfortunately.
Best regards
Carsten Kropf
Am 24.06.2010 um 17:08 schrieb Tom Lane:
> Carsten Kropf <ckropf2(at)fh-hof(dot)de> writes:
>> However, it is a little bit strange, that I get toasted values (when inserting from another table) and untoasted values, if I insert items directly. Could anybody please explain this to me?
>
> Huh? An index will never ever get passed an externally-toasted value.
> See the TOAST_INDEX_HACK code in indextuple.c.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-06-24 16:04:12 | EOL for 7.4 and 8.0 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-06-24 15:15:23 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add TCP keepalive support to libpq. |