| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |
| Date: | 2021-05-03 18:36:59 |
| Message-ID: | c929a9650f57e0bd908f5e8d540a62702455a9bc.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2021-05-03 at 10:38 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I don't think it's much good to just do that. You probably need a
> full
> 64-bits for something like a column store. But that's all you need.
I would definitely like that for citus columnar, and it would
definitely make it easier to manage the address space, but I won't
demand it today. 48 bits is a workable tuple address space for many
purposes, especially when you factor in logical partitioning.
I will be dealing with gaps though, so wasting 5 bits of address space
(2^16 / MaxOffsetNumber = 32) to bring it down to 43 bits is not great.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2021-05-03 18:41:07 | Re: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2021-05-03 18:13:15 | Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs |