From: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Viability of VARLENA_FIXED_SIZE() |
Date: | 2000-09-04 17:47:13 |
Message-ID: | 39B3E021.5B126738@alumni.caltech.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> Not sure if any of this is worth keeping, or if we should just simplify
> the code in heaptuple.c to get rid of the notion of "fixed size"
> varlena attributes. It's certainly not going to be a mainstream case
> anymore, so I question whether the check has any hope of saving more
> cycles than it costs. Yet it seems a shame to wipe out this hack
> entirely...
Not sure if this is relevant (but when does that stop me ;):
The only truly "fixed length" string from a storage standpoint is for
single-byte encodings (and Unicode, I suppose). Eventually, we will need
the notion of both "octet length" *and* "character length" in our
backend code, and for non-ASCII encodings nothing will be of fixed octet
length anyway.
- Thomas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael | 2000-09-04 18:01:40 | Select NULL value with cursor |
Previous Message | Ian Turner | 2000-09-04 17:31:27 | Re: subselect in CHECK constraint? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-09-04 18:25:28 | Re: A fine point about OUTER JOIN semantics |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-09-04 16:29:16 | Re: OO inheritance implementation |