| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hugo Mercier <hugo(dot)mercier(at)oslandia(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Detection of nested function calls |
| Date: | 2013-10-28 16:33:38 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaQdd6DyY9HJxr7HYFDwtTYKaS1piZCDnBTg2Bw1r_i3g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The idea I'm thinking about at the moment is that toast tokens of this
> sort might each contain a function pointer to the required flattening
> function. This avoids an expensive catalog lookup when flattening is
> needed. We'd never accept such a thing for data destined for disk;
> but since the whole point here is that such data lives only in memory,
> I can't see anything wrong with including a function pointer in it.
This might be OK, but it bloats the in-memory representation. For
small data types like numeric that might well be significant.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-10-28 16:34:57 | Re: RULE regression test fragility? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-10-28 16:31:26 | Re: OSX doesn't accept identical source/target for strcpy() anymore |