Re: ERROR row is too big size 9336, exceeds size 8160 when populating record with tsquery and tsvector fields
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ERROR row is too big size 9336, exceeds size 8160 when populating record with tsquery and tsvector fields |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29927.1290094098@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ERROR row is too big size 9336, exceeds size 8160 when populating record with tsquery and tsvector fields (Allan Kamau <kamauallan@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: ERROR row is too big size 9336, exceeds size 8160 when
populating record with tsquery and tsvector fields
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Allan Kamau <kamauallan@gmail.com> writes: > CREATE TABLE farm.produce > (id INTEGER NOT NULL DEFAULT NEXTVAL('farm.produce_seq') > ,process___id TEXT NOT NULL > ,item_names tsvector NULL > ,product__ids__tsquery tsquery NULL > ,product__ids__tsvector tsvector NULL > ,population_time TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT clock_timestamp() > ,PRIMARY KEY(id) > ) > It seems the tsvector field did not contribute to this error as the > error occurred when I attempted to populate the tsquery field with > rather long tsquery data. Without populating the tsvector field but > got the same error with the same size message indicating that the data > in the tsvector fields do not lead to this problem. Yeah, on poking into the system catalogs I see that tsquery is declared as not supporting toasting (it has typstorage = 'p'lain). I don't offhand know the implementation reason for that or whether it would be a good idea to change it. But obviously Teodor's expectation was that nobody would ever want to store large tsqueries on disk. I guess it would be worth asking what's your use-case for storing tsquery, as opposed to tsvector? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: