From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Solving the OID-collision problem |
Date: | 2005-08-04 16:20:24 |
Message-ID: | 16384.1123172424@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm too lazy to run an experiment, but I believe it would. Datum is
>> involved in almost every function-call API in the backend. In
>> particular this means that it would affect performance-critical code
>> paths.
> I hear you on the "lazy" part, but if OID becomes a structure, then you
> are still comparing a native type until you get a match, then you make one
> more comparison to confirm it is the right one, or move on.
No, you're missing the point entirely: on 32-bit architectures, passing
a 32-bit integral type to a function is an extremely well optimized
operation, as is returning a 32-bit integral type. Passing or
returning a 64-bit struct is, um, not so well optimized.
There's also the small problem that it really has to fit into Datum.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin M. Roy | 2005-08-04 16:37:24 | Re: US Census database (Tiger 2004FE) - 4.4G |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-08-04 16:09:33 | buildfarm happenings |