Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?)
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140425170022.GC12174@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?) (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Composite Datums containing toasted fields are a bad idea(?)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-04-25 18:25:44 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2014-04-25 12:05:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > > The case I am worried most about is queries like: > > > SELECT a, b FROM f WHERE f > ROW(38, 'whatever') ORDER BY f; > > > I've seen such generated by a some query generators for paging. But I > > > guess that's something we're going to have to accept. > > > > Meh ... is it likely that the columns involved in an ordering comparison > > would be so wide as to be toasted out-of-line? Such a query would only be > > fast if the row value were indexed, which would pretty much preclude use > > of wide columns. > > In the cases I've seen it it was usually used in addition to a indexable > condition, just for paging across different http requests. > > As completely ridiculous example: > before: > postgres=# EXPLAIN (ANALYZE, BUFFERS) SELECT * FROM pg_rewrite r WHERE r > ('x'::name, '11854'::oid, NULL, NULL, NULL,NULL); > QUERY PLAN Just for some clarity, that also happens with expressions like: WHERE ROW(ev_class, rulename, ev_action) >= ROW('pg_rewrite'::regclass, '_RETURN', NULL) ORDER BY ROW(ev_class, rulename, ev_action); which is what is generated by such query generators - where the leading columns *are* indexed but not necessarily unique. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: