Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "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>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?
Date: 2009-01-05 07:38:21
Message-ID: 4961B8ED.7070707@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

James Mansion wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> c. Are there any well-known pitfalls/objections which would prevent
>>> me from
>>> changing the algorithm to something more efficient (read: IO-bound)?
>>>
>>
>> copyright licenses and patents
>>
> Would it be possible to have a plugin facility?

Well, before we consider that, we'd probably want to see proof about the
effectiveness of other compression methods.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2009-01-05 08:06:45 log output of vxid
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2009-01-05 06:06:57 Re: contrib/pg_stat_statements 1226