| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: A varint implementation for PG? |
| Date: | 2021-08-04 19:37:36 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ=ehpB8AgJduS7rgBQUYfNHFF-KEFuPNuyC6wN=6qaWw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 3:01 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Extending that to arbitrary lengths obviously at some point makes the encoding
> in unary wasteful, and the benefit of few branches vanishes. So what I was
> thinking is that for variable length pieces of data that are not limited to 8
> bytes, we could replace the '8 0 bits' special case with a new special case:
> The length in bytes follows as a max-8-byte varint.
But what if I have a machine with more than 16 exabytes of RAM and I
want to use all of its memory to store one really big integer?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-08-04 19:44:44 | Re: RFC: Improve CPU cache locality of syscache searches |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2021-08-04 19:09:30 | Re: Lowering the ever-growing heap->pd_lower |