Re: "Truncated" tuples for tuple hash tables

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: "Truncated" tuples for tuple hash tables
Date: 2006-06-26 19:59:42
Message-ID: 22256.1151351982@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 14:36 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I thought for awhile about MemoryTuple (as contrasted to HeapTuple) but
>> that seems too generic. Any other thoughts?

> I like MemoryTuple but since we only use it when we go to disk...

> ExecutorTuple, MinimalTuple, DataOnlyTuple, MultTuple, TempFileTuple

MinimalTuple seems good to me ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2006-06-26 20:12:55 Re: [PATCHES] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-06-26 19:57:31 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Change the row constructor syntax (ROW(...))