| 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 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| 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).
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-01-04 04:01:15 | Re: generic reloptions improvement |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-01-04 03:34:37 | Time to finalize patches for 8.4 beta |