Re: Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory
Date: 2015-02-11 05:58:07
Message-ID: 54DAEF6F.8060607@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/10/15 5:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> writes:
>> Without having read the patch, I think this is great. I've been wishing
>> for something like this while working on my variant data type.
>
>> Are there any cases where we would want to use this on a non-variant?
>> Perhaps types where we're paying an alignment penalty?
>
> What do you mean by non-variant?

Ugh, sorry, brainfart. I meant to say non-varlena.

I can't think of any non-varlena types we'd want this for, but maybe
someone else can think of a case. If there is a use-case I wouldn't
handle it with this patch, but we'd want to consider it...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2015-02-11 06:15:53 Re: reducing our reliance on MD5
Previous Message Claudio Freire 2015-02-11 04:35:00 Re: reducing our reliance on MD5