Re: [HACKERS] Binary cursor header changed from 20 to 16 Bytes?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "G(dot) Anthony Reina" <reina(at)nsi(dot)edu>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Binary cursor header changed from 20 to 16 Bytes?
Date: 1999-08-02 18:22:40
Message-ID: 1818.933618160@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"G. Anthony Reina" <reina(at)nsi(dot)edu> writes:
> The only thing that seems to have problems is when you select multiple
> variables. For this case, you have to put all of your arrays at the
> end.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. What happens if you
don't?

> I don't need to offset by 16 bytes to get the 2nd and 3rd column (cycles and
> time_instants); I only need to do this for the 1st column (repetition).

Right, there'd not be any array overhead for non-array datatypes...

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Mount 1999-08-02 18:50:09 Re: your mail
Previous Message The Hermit Hacker 1999-08-02 17:56:20 Re: your mail