Re: Per tuple overhead, cmin, cmax, OID

From: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Per tuple overhead, cmin, cmax, OID
Date: 2002-05-21 10:54:10
Message-ID: cv8keug26puo9gil03hci8peesct2d6v4o@4ax.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 02 May 2002 21:10:40 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
wrote:
>Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at> writes:
>> Is saving 4 bytes per tuple a "darn good reason"?
>
>[...] Now if
>we could get rid of 8 bytes in the header, I'd get excited ;-)

Tom,

what about WITHOUT OIDS? I know dropping the OID from some tables and
keeping it for others is not trivial, because t_oid is the _first_
field of HeapTupleHeaderData. I'm vaguely considering a few possible
implementations and will invest more work in a detailed proposal, if
it's wanted.

Servus
Manfred

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2002-05-21 12:00:22 Re: Future plans
Previous Message Dave Page 2002-05-21 10:29:56 Re: More schema queries