Re: Number of attributes in HeapTupleHeader

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>
Cc: "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>, "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, "Neil Conway" <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Number of attributes in HeapTupleHeader
Date: 2002-05-08 20:54:16
Message-ID: 12453.1020891256@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at> writes:
> An ALTER TABLE statement makes a new copy of the metadata describing
> the table, modifies the copy and gives it a unique (for this table)
> version number. It does not change or remove old metadata.

This has been discussed before --- in PG terms, it'd mean keeping the
OID of a rowtype in the tuple header. (No, I won't let you get away
with a 1-byte integer. But you could remove natts and hoff, thus
buying back 3 of the 4 bytes.)

I was actually going to suggest it again earlier in this thread; but
people weren't excited about the idea last time it was brought up,
so I decided not to bother. It'd be a *lot* of work and a lot of
breakage of existing clients (eg, pg_attribute would need to link
to pg_type not pg_class, pg_class.relnatts would move to pg_type,
etc etc). The flexibility looks cool, but people seem to feel that
the price is too high for the actual amount of usefulness.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurette Cisneros 2002-05-08 21:17:53 pg_ctl -v
Previous Message mlw 2002-05-08 20:12:17 Re: Path to PostgreSQL portabiliy