Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Wasn't this proposed and rejected before? (Or more to the point,
>> why'd you bother? The advantage over bytea seems negligible.)
> well, one nice things about the fixed length types is that you can
> keep your table from needing a toast table when you have a bytea in
> it.
If you don't actually use the toast table, it doesn't cost anything very
noticeable ...
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
