From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater@gmx.net>
To: pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Regarding postgreSQL performance on DRAM
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 21:42:22 +0100
Message-ID: <f37b7ea7-966d-d54a-bf8d-a1c7229e5f8a@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87va1exlfo.fsf@jsievers.enova.com>
References: <CADb0YNk+jYXt6oC3vefFzOigmG8WOCkXmeAq5L8ABA4eMbypHA@mail.gmail.com>
<87va1exlfo.fsf@jsievers.enova.com>
Jerry Sievers schrieb am 20.02.2019 um 21:19:
>> My workload is simple. I insert 1 million rows into a table with 100
>> columns, where each column is 256 bytes in length, and every 10
>> inserts are batched into a transaction.
>
> Your test workload qualifies for TOASTing due to the $unrealistically
> long physical tuple size.
Hmm. I though TOAST is only applied to single values, not the entire tuple (row)?
As each column is substantially shorter than the TOAST threshold, I would not expect toasting to kick in here.
Or am I missing something?
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: spam_eater@gmx.net, pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Regarding postgreSQL performance on DRAM
In-Reply-To: <f37b7ea7-966d-d54a-bf8d-a1c7229e5f8a@gmx.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox