X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B75C9DC97D for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:43:48 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13851-04 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:43:52 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from peufeu.com (unknown [82.67.9.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3869DC821 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:43:45 -0400 (AST) Received: (qmail 651 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2006 16:43:54 +0100 Received: from unknown (HELO apollo13) (82.67.9.10) by boutiquenumerique.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2006 16:43:54 +0100 To: "Tom Lane" Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Bad plan on a view References: <10652.1141226168@sss.pgh.pa.us> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 16:43:53 +0100 From: PFC Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <10652.1141226168@sss.pgh.pa.us> User-Agent: Opera M2/8.51 (Linux, build 1462) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100] X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200603/6 X-Sequence-Number: 17443 > Aren't you going to a lot of work to reinvent something that TOAST > already does for you? (At least, in the cases where the text fields > are wide enough that it really matters.) I know. But I have several text fields in the 20 to 200 characters, which is too small for toast, but large enough to make up about 90% of the table size, which makes it problematic RAM-wise, especially since it's gonna grow. Now, if I had 1 big text field, it would be TOASTed and I would be happy ;)