Re: Modifying TOAST thresholds
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Modifying TOAST thresholds |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4916.1175105300@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Modifying TOAST thresholds (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Modifying TOAST thresholds
Re: Modifying TOAST thresholds |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes: > "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> I also think that we ought to add TOAST_MAX_CHUNK_SIZE to the set of >> compiled-in parameters that are recorded in pg_control and checked for >> compatibility at startup (like BLCKSZ) --- this will prevent anyone from >> shooting themselves in the foot while experimenting. > Is there any reason to experiment with this? I would have thought we would > divorce TOAST_MAX_CHUNK_SIZE from TOAST_THRESHOLD and hard code it as the same > expression that's there now. Ie, the largest size that can fit in a page. No, right now it's the largest size that you can fit 4 on a page. It's not obvious to me that 4 is optimal once it's divorced from TOAST_THRESHOLD. It seems possible that the correct number is 1, and even if it's useful to keep the tuples smaller than that, there's no reason to assume 4 is the best number per page. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: