| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Large expressions in indexes can't be stored (non-TOASTable) |
| Date: | 2025-04-08 11:14:02 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LeMM8royHj5UyMBDbspD7+_70AJkV4Uji122hmkn7jOw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 7:58 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 05:16:43PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Can we dodge adding this push call if we restrict the length of the
> > origin name to some reasonable limit like 256 or 512 and avoid the
> > need of toast altogether?
>
> We did consider just removing pg_replication_origin's TOAST table earlier
> [0], but we decided against it at that time. Maybe it's worth
> reconsidering...
>
I don't see any good reason in that email for not removing the TOAST
table for pg_replication_origin. I would prefer to remove it rather
than add protection related to its access.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrei Lepikhov | 2025-04-08 11:31:45 | Re: Some problems regarding the self-join elimination code |
| Previous Message | jian he | 2025-04-08 10:53:25 | Re: Change COPY ... ON_ERROR ignore to ON_ERROR ignore_row |