This is really a theoretical/anecdotal question, as I'm not at a scale yet where this would measurable. I want to investigate while this is fresh in my mind... I recall reading that unless a row has columns that are TOASTed, an `UPDATE` is essentially an `INSERT + DELETE`, with the previous row marked for vacuuming. A few of my tables have the following characteristics: - The Primary Key has many other tables/columns that FKEY onto it. - Many columns (30+) of small data size - Most columns (90%) are 1 WRITE(UPDATE) for 1000 READS - Some columns (10%) do a bit of internal bookkeeping and are 1 WRITE(UPDATE) for 50 READS Has anyone done testing/benchmarking on potential efficiency/savings by consolidating the frequent UPDATE columns into their own table? -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general