Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On the other hand, the problem of the FSM taking up 24kB for an 8kB
>>> table seems clearly worth fixing, but I don't think I have the cycles
>>> for it at present. Maybe a TODO is in order.
> I certainly think that'd be worth a TODO. Whether the rest of this is
> worth worrying about I'm not sure.
Surely we could just prevent creation of the FSM until the table has
reached at least, say, 10 blocks.
Any threshold beyond one block would mean potential space wastage,
but it's hard to get excited about that until you're into the dozens
of pages.
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
