From: | "Gregory S(dot) Williamson" <gsw(at)globexplorer(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | "PostGIS Users Discussion" <postgis-users(at)postgis(dot)refractions(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: [postgis-users] Is my query planner failing me, or vice versa? |
Date: | 2005-12-15 00:23:47 |
Message-ID: | 71E37EF6B7DCC1499CEA0316A2568328024BBCD3@loki.wc.globexplorer.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Forgive the cross-posting, but I found myself wondering if might not be some way future way of telling the planner that a given table (column ?) has a high likelyhood of being TOASTed. Similar to the random_page_cost in spirit. We've got a lot of indexed data that is spatial and have some table where no data is toasted (road segments) and others where evrything is.
An idle suggestion from one who knows that he is meddling with ;-}
Greg Williamson
DBA
GlobeXplorer LLC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: postgis-users-bounces(at)postgis(dot)refractions(dot)net
> [mailto:postgis-users-bounces(at)postgis(dot)refractions(dot)net]On Behalf Of
> Jessica M Salmon
> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 9:09 AM
> To: PostGIS Users Discussion
> Subject: Re: [postgis-users] Is my query planner failing me, or vice versa?
>
> Thanks, Marcus, for explaining.
>
> And thanks, Robert, for asking that question about adjusting page size.
>
> My tuples are definitely toasted (some of my geometries are 30X too big for
> a single page!), so I'm glad I'm aware of the TOAST tables now. I suppose
> there's not much to be done about it, but it's good to know.
>
> Thanks everyone for such an array of insightful help.
>
> -Meghan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2005-12-15 00:36:00 | Re: Simple Join |
Previous Message | Kevin Brown | 2005-12-14 23:52:45 | Re: Simple Join |