Re: [HACKERS] LZTEXT for rule plan stings

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL HACKERS <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] LZTEXT for rule plan stings
Date: 2000-02-26 18:55:12
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20000226105512.016e6c60@mail.pacifier.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 12:15 PM 2/26/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:

>and (except for not using any excess whitespace) that is exactly what
>goes into a rule action string.
>
>As you can see, this is very amenable to compression, especially
>when you have a lot of columns in a view.
>
>Someday we might think about using a more compact representation for
>stored rules, but there are advantages to using a format that's fairly
>easy for a human to examine.

Oh, now I understand, I didn't realize the tree was being stored in
human-readable form as a string, but thought it was being parsed into
a binary form. That's why I began having doubts that I might've triggered
unecessary work on Jan's part regarding lztext. Yes, since it's
stored as a text string lztext should help a LOT.

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-02-26 21:35:09 Re: [HACKERS] LZTEXT for rule plan stings
Previous Message Don Baccus 2000-02-26 18:49:14 Re: [HACKERS] LZTEXT for rule plan stings