> 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 :-)
Oh, now I get it. Some TOAST values may be out-of line. Can we really
throw char() into TOAST? I guess we can. We have to record somewhere
that we have toasted that tuple and disable the offset cache for it.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
