Andres Freund writes:
> I'm not quite sure where the aversion to adding a toast table to
> pg_class is coming from?
I'm not at all sure it would work, and would rather not introduce
risks of infinite recursion if they're not necessary.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgs
On 2017-06-12 19:00:02 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2017-06-12 18:10:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> it'd be worthwhile checking some actual examples rather than guessing.
>
> > It's indeed not very compact. E.g a simple example with small types:
>
> > CREATE TABLE parti
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2017-06-12 18:10:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> it'd be worthwhile checking some actual examples rather than guessing.
> It's indeed not very compact. E.g a simple example with small types:
> CREATE TABLE partitioned(a int, b int, c timestamptz, data text) PARTITION BY
On 2017-06-12 18:10:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> How about gathering some actual evidence on the point --- ie, how big
> >> a partition expression do you need to make it fall over?
>
> > You'd need a 2kB expression (after compression) in
> > relpartb
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> How about gathering some actual evidence on the point --- ie, how big
>> a partition expression do you need to make it fall over?
> You'd need a 2kB expression (after compression) in
> relpartbound before you hit a problem here. I wouldn't worry about
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2017-06-12 17:10:28 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> Cases where relacl became too large have been known to exist. I'm not
> >> sure whether relpartbound can really be that large to change the
> >> scenario significantly.
>
> > Because it's furth
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2017-06-12 17:10:28 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Cases where relacl became too large have been known to exist. I'm not
>> sure whether relpartbound can really be that large to change the
>> scenario significantly.
> Because it's further increasing the size by some
On 2017-06-12 17:10:28 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/12/17 15:38, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Just noticed that pg_class now has several varlena fields:
> > #ifdef CATALOG_VARLEN /* variable-length fields start
> > here */
> > /* NOTE: These fields are not present in
On 6/12/17 15:38, Andres Freund wrote:
> Just noticed that pg_class now has several varlena fields:
> #ifdef CATALOG_VARLEN /* variable-length fields start here */
> /* NOTE: These fields are not present in a relcache entry's rd_rel
> field. */
> aclitem relacl[
