| From: | Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: byte-size of column values |
| Date: | 2022-10-19 08:03:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAFCRh--cR8pcY2zijULqiM9CWMkmE-qujp6g=O5W3cOwmwoHxg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 6:04 PM David G. Johnston
<david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 8:53 AM Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm surprised by the result for bit(3) and char, when calling pg_column_size().
> The base type is what matters, if the length of the actual type is a parameter
> (the (n) part) the underlying type must be variable.
Thanks. Interesting. Didn't know (n)-suffixed "fixed-length" types
where always based on variable-size ones.
>> How does one store as compactedly as possible several small enums
> int2
OK, I see. Thanks again.
> p.s., pretend char doesn't even exist.
I realize that now. Wasn't obvious to me, despite the warning in the doc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dominique Devienne | 2022-10-19 08:21:02 | Re: byte-size of column values |
| Previous Message | Yavuz TANRIVERDİ | 2022-10-19 07:31:09 | Re: Is this error expected ? |