| From: | Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <jwieck(at)debis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size |
| Date: | 1999-07-09 01:41:31 |
| Message-ID: | 3785534B.8743BF35@krs.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck wrote:
>
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I agree this is the way to go. There is nothing I can think of that is
> > limited to how large a tuple can be.
>
> Outch - I can.
>
> Having an index on a varlen field that now doesn't fit any
> more into an index block. Wouldn't this cause problems? Well
> it's bad database design to index fields that will receive
> that long data because indexing them will blow up the
> database but it must work anyway.
Seems that in other DBMSes len of index tuple is more restricted
than len of heap one. So I think we shouldn't worry about this case.
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Philip Warner | 1999-07-09 01:58:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 1999-07-09 01:12:20 | Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size |