Re: [Solved] SQL Server to PostgreSQL

Tom Lane wrote:
> Now that you mention it, though, doesn't TOAST break heapam's assumption
> that char(n) is fixed length?  Seems like we'd better either remove that
> assumption or mark char(n) nontoastable.  Any opinions which is better?

    Is  the  saved overhead from assuming char(n) is fixed really
    that big that it's worth NOT to gain  the  TOAST  advantages?
    After  the  GB  benchmarks  we  know  that we have some spare
    performance to waste for such things :-)


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #