Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> opinion isn't strong in this topic. One or twenty useless detoasting
>> isn't really significant in almost use cases (problem is thousands
>> detoasting).
> Yeah. Many-times-repeated detoasting is really bad, and this is not
> the only place in the backend where we have this problem. :-(
Yeah, there's been some discussion of a more general solution, and I
think I even had a trial patch at one point (which turned out not to
work terribly well, but maybe somebody will have a better idea someday).
In the meantime, the proposal at hand seems like a bit of a stop-gap,
which is why I'd prefer to see something with a very minimal code
footprint. Detoast at assignment would likely need only a few lines
of code added in a single place.
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
