Re: Extending varlena

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Extending varlena
Date: 2008-08-18 23:19:18
Message-ID: 7984.1219101558@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com> writes:
> Anyways (back on topic), I am in favor of removing limits from any
> section of the database ... not just your suggestion. The end-user
> application should impose limits.

That's nice as an abstract principle, but there are only so many hours
in the day, so we need to prioritize which limits we're going to get rid
of. The 4-byte limit on individual Datum sizes does not strike me as a
limit that's going to be significant for practical use any time soon.
(I grant David's premise that people will soon want to work with objects
that are larger than that --- but not that they'll want to push them
around as indivisible, store-and-fetch-as-a-unit field values.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Chernow 2008-08-18 23:24:57 Re: Extending varlena
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2008-08-18 23:11:40 Re: Extending varlena