| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Save a few bytes in pg_attribute |
| Date: | 2023-03-21 20:11:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20230321201146.yukskxrfsmb5n6jj@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-03-21 15:26:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > ... with that patch we actually don't need the attcacheoff in the
> > pg_atttribute struct: it only needs to be present in the derived
> > "TupleAttrAlignData" structs which carry the
> > length/alignment/storage/byval info.
>
> Yeah, I was wondering about that too: keeping attcacheoff as local
> state in slots might get us all its win without so much conceptual
> dirtiness.
It's also the place where it's the least likely to help - afaict attcacheoff
is only really beneficial for fastgetattr(). Which conditions it's use more
strictly - not only can there not be any NULLs before the accessed column,
there may not be any NULLs in the tuple at all.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sergei Kornilov | 2023-03-21 20:18:35 | Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements |
| Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2023-03-21 20:02:08 | Re: Save a few bytes in pg_attribute |