hi,
thanks for taking a look.
> yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) writes:
>> the attached patch is to avoid unnecessary detoast'ing and EOF marker pages
>> when possible. does it make sense?
>
> The blob page size is already chosen not to allow for out-of-line
> storage, not to mention that pg_largeobject doesn't have a TOAST table.
> So I think avoiding detoasting is largely a waste of time.
doesn't detoasting involve decompression?
> I'm
> unexcited about the other consideration too --- it looks to me like it
> just makes truncation slower, more complicated, and hence more
> bug-prone, in return for a possible speedup that probably nobody will
> ever notice.
slower? it depends, i guess.
my primary motivation of that part of the patch was to save some space for
certain workloads. (besides that, leaving unnecessary rows isn't neat,
but it might be a matter of taste.)
YAMAMOTO Takashi
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-novice mailing list (pgsql-novice@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-novice