Re: t_self as system column

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar jul 06 17:24:21 -0400 2010:
>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> > In any case, having a mutable logical column
>> > position is the feature that's been most requested.
>>
>> I think that's true.  But the physical storage position would give us
>> a performance benefit, by allowing us to try to avoid useless
>> alignment padding.
>
> That's true too.  I intend to look at both problems simultaneously, i.e.
> decoupling the current attnum in three columns as previously discussed;
> as Tom says, I think it'll end up being less work than attacking them
> separately.  However, I will not attempt to include optimizations such
> as avoiding padding, in the first patch, just the possibility that it is
> added later.

Sounds great.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company