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

Re: Current enums patch

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc>
Subject: Re: Current enums patch
Date: 2007-03-31 22:48:55
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Is there a specific reason for
>>> pg_enum.enumname to be type name and not type text?
>> IIRC at one stage Tom wanted to try to make these identifiers, but that 
>> was quickly abandoned. This might be a hangover from that.
> Actually I think I see the reason: it's a bit of a pain in the neck to
> use the syscache mechanism with text-type lookup keys.  I'm not 100%
> convinced that we really need to have syscaches on pg_enum, but if those
> stay then it's probably not worth the trouble to avoid the limitation.

That rings a faint bell.

If we don't have syscaches on pg_enum won't enum i/o get more expensive?



In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-03-31 23:01:03
Subject: Re: COPY-able sql log outputs
Previous:From: Henry B. HotzDate: 2007-03-31 22:41:23
Subject: Preliminary GSSAPI Patches

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group