Message-ID: <55A585CE.306@BlueTreble.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 16:57:34 -0500
From: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, Julien Tachoires <julmon@gmail.com>,
 Alex Shulgin <ash@commandprompt.com>, Alvaro Herrera
 <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert
 Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: patch : Allow toast tables to be moved to a different tablespace
References: <5504FBA9.3020900@proxel.se> <5504FDBE.4000006@proxel.se>
 <5505DD23.2020207@gmail.com> <5507DF26.3090206@gmail.com>
 <5509C9F2.9040403@proxel.se> <550AF15E.4020006@gmail.com>
 <550B5CBE.3020601@proxel.se> <550D61D9.9060602@gmail.com>
 <550D6A82.2070208@proxel.se> <20713.1435961038@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20150707120744.GM30359@alap3.anarazel.de>
In-Reply-To: <20150707120744.GM30359@alap3.anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2015 21:57:40.5537 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR11MB0678
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers>
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>
List-ID: <pgsql-hackers.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-hackers>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 7/7/15 7:07 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-07-03 18:03:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I have just looked through this thread, and TBH I think we should reject
>> this patch altogether --- not RWF, but "no we don't want this".  The
>> use-case remains hypothetical: no performance numbers showing a real-world
>> benefit have been exhibited AFAICS.
>
> It's not that hard to imagine a performance benefit though? If the
> toasted column is accessed infrequently/just after filtering on other
> columns (not uncommon) it could very well be beneficial to put the main
> table on fast storage (SSD) and the toast table on slow storage
> (spinning rust).
>
> I've seen humoungous toast tables that are barely ever read for tables
> that are constantly a couple times in the field.

+1. I know of one case where the heap was ~8GB and TOAST was over 400GB.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers