From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: TOAST usage setting |
Date: | 2007-05-30 16:10:28 |
Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA579021B2BBB@m0143.s-mxs.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Whereas if you set toast_tuples_per_page to 8k then the only option
> > for Postgres will be to put each datum in its own page and
> waste 1-3k
> > on every page.
>
> No, because actually the code is designed to make the toast
> chunk size just enough less than 8K that the tuples fit.
He mentioned toasted values of 6-7k each. If all values are of that size
(like payment slip tiffs) there is nothing we would do with the
remaining 1-2k on each page. But that disadvantage disappears as soon as
you have just a little more variability in the length. Still, it might
be enough to opt for some freespace reuse smarts if we can think of a
cheap heuristic. But the cost to fetch such a "distributed" tuple would
be so huge I doubt there is anything to win but disk space.
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-05-30 16:18:02 | Style of file error messages |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-05-30 16:00:23 | Re: TOAST usage setting |