Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> I do remember that discussion. Aside from the problem you mention, it
> also seems that maintaining the hash table and doing lookups into it
> would have some intrinsic cost.
Well, sure, but it's still far cheaper than going out to the toast table
(which will require multiple hashtable lookups, not to mention I/O and
possible lock blocking). If we could solve the refcounting problem I
think this would be a very significant win.
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
