On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
>> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 13:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Thinking about it again, it seems to me that a much narrower patch
>>> could solve the specific forms of the problem that the PostGIS folk
>>> are seeing. Instead of trying to have a general-purpose method of
>>> preventing repeat de-toasting, we could just prevent it for inner
>>> indexscans by having ExecIndexEvalRuntimeKeys() detoast anything it's
>>> passing to the index AM.
>
>> With this patch, are there still situations where we should be concerned
>> about repeated de-toasting, or does this solve the biggest part of the
>> problem?
>
> Well, it solves the case people have actually complained about (twice
> now). I originally attempted to solve a larger set of cases, but it's
> not clear there's enough value in that.
How related is this issue?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-12/msg00369.php
...Robert
