Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Reduce heap tuple header size

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Reduce heap tuple header size
Date: 2002-06-21 13:46:38
Message-ID: 3D132E3E.E3EBC8CC@Yahoo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> Jan Wieck wrote:
> > > I don't think enough people use pg_upgrade to make it a reason to keep
> > > an extra four bytes of tuple overhead.  I realize 8-byte aligned systems
> > > don't benefit, but most of our platforms are 4-byte aligned.  I don't
> > > consider redundency a valid reason either.  We just don't have many
> > > table corruption complaints, and the odds that having an extra 4 bytes
> > > is going to make detection or correction better is unlikely.
> >
> > The non-overwriting storage management (which is one reason why whe need
> > all these header fields) causes over 30 bytes of row overhead anyway. I
> > am with Tom here, 4 bytes per row isn't worth making the tuple header
> > variable length size.
> 
> Woh, I didn't see anything about making the header variable size.  The
> issue was that on 8-byte machines, structure alignment will not allow
> any savings.  However, on 4-byte machines, it will be a savings of ~11%
> in the tuple header.

You're right. Dunno where I got that idea from.

Looking at the patch I find it quite confusing using Xmin as Xmax,
sometimes. If we use 3 physical variables for 5 virtual ones in that
way, I would rather use generic names.


Jan

-- 

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2002-06-21 13:47:41
Subject: Re: ADTs and embedded sql
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-06-21 13:44:36
Subject: Re: Reduce heap tuple header size

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-06-21 14:02:51
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] pg_dumpall should permit quiet operation
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-06-21 13:44:36
Subject: Re: Reduce heap tuple header size

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group