Re: Why the lp_len is 28 not 32?

From: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "jacktby(at)gmail(dot)com" <jacktby(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why the lp_len is 28 not 32?
Date: 2023-02-26 15:07:21
Message-ID: fe359f0a-525e-0064-884f-0d09bc7047b6@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/26/23 15:35, jacktby(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
> use these sqls below:
> create table t(a int);
> insert into t values(1);
> select lp,lp_off,lp_len,t_data from heap_page_items(get_raw_page('t',0));
>  lp | lp_off | lp_len |   t_data   
> ----+--------+--------+------------
>   1 |   8160 |     28 | \x01000000
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty sure this is because we align the data to MAXALIGN, and on x86_64
that's 8 bytes. 28 is not a multiple of 8 while 32 is.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message jacktby@gmail.com 2023-02-26 15:11:36 Re: Re: Why the lp_len is 28 not 32?
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2023-02-26 14:59:41 Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump