| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Arthur Silva <arthurprs(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Memory Alignment in Postgres |
| Date: | 2014-09-10 20:29:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20140910202929.GB21173@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:43:52AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> But there are a couple of obvious problems with this idea, too, such as:
>
> 1. It's really complicated and a ton of work.
> 2. It would break pg_upgrade pretty darn badly unless we employed some
> even-more-complex strategy to mitigate that.
> 3. The savings might not be enough to justify the effort.
>
> It might be interesting for someone to develop a tool measuring the
> number of bytes of alignment padding we lose per tuple or per page and
> gather some statistics on it on various databases. That would give us
> some sense as to the possible savings.
And will we ever implement a logical attribute system so we can reorder
the stored attribtes to minimize wasted space?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-09-10 20:35:55 | Re: SKIP LOCKED DATA (work in progress) |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-09-10 20:21:40 | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers |