From: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: MaxOffsetNumber versus MaxHeapTuplesPerPage |
Date: | 2007-10-25 11:07:13 |
Message-ID: | 472078E1.6000804@sun.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>> Is there any reason to have both these macros? By my opinion
>> MaxHeapTuplesPerPage is more accurate and it should replace all
>> MaxOffsetNumber occurrence.
>
> We use MaxOffsetNumber with index pages as well.
I forgot to indexes, but there is MaxIndexTuplesPerPage which is also
better estimation for indexes.
> At quick glance, the only places I can see where we could replace
> MaxOffsetNumber with MaxHeapTuplesPerPage, are in vacuum.c and
> vacuumlazy.c, where we allocate arrays big enough to hold potentially a
> full page's worth of tuples. We could change those, but it's hardly
> worth the trouble.
Yes, it is a cleanup (maybe reduce some memory requirements), but I
think is better to reduce different macros to avoid future problem, when
somebody forget changes all of these macros.
Zdenek
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dharmendra Goyal | 2007-10-25 11:23:44 | Re: order by in cursor declaration does not allow update |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-10-25 11:05:07 | Re: order by in cursor declaration does not allow update |