| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, 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 15:31:37 |
| Message-ID: | 14597.1141486297@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> 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.
Another problem with it is that it'd destroy the current optimizations
that allow partial fetches of uncompressed TOASTed fields to be fast.
You couldn't fetch page N of a TOAST datum without reading all the pages
before it.
I suppose the objection that toast tables wouldn't be regular tables
anymore might not be fatal, but you'll certainly get some pushback if
you try to take away the direct-access optimizations.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paesold | 2006-03-04 15:40:59 | Re: Foreign keys for non-default datatypes |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-03-04 15:24:35 | Re: Foreign keys for non-default datatypes |