From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: t_self as system column |
Date: | 2010-07-07 20:44:10 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimvi1QvlLSeUfmI_dcqPplF3bKMXZ3VfotVJFtL@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar jul 06 17:24:21 -0400 2010:
>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> > In any case, having a mutable logical column
>> > position is the feature that's been most requested.
>>
>> I think that's true. But the physical storage position would give us
>> a performance benefit, by allowing us to try to avoid useless
>> alignment padding.
>
> That's true too. I intend to look at both problems simultaneously, i.e.
> decoupling the current attnum in three columns as previously discussed;
> as Tom says, I think it'll end up being less work than attacking them
> separately. However, I will not attempt to include optimizations such
> as avoiding padding, in the first patch, just the possibility that it is
> added later.
Sounds great.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-07-07 21:05:55 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add note that using PL/Python 2 and 3 in the same session will |
Previous Message | James William Pye | 2010-07-07 20:31:56 | Re: Python Interface Hacking |