| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: sorting table columns |
| Date: | 2011-12-21 19:02:00 |
| Message-ID: | 1324493999-sup-1134@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Simon Riggs's message of mié dic 21 15:53:20 -0300 2011:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > This one I'm not sure about at all:
> >
> >> * "very large number of columns" for statistical data sets where we
> >> automatically vertically partition the heap when faced with large
> >> numbers of column definitions
>
> We currently have pg_attribute.attnum as an int2, so we can store up
> to 32768 columns without changing that size, as long as we have some
> place to put the data.
Hm, right.
> Was there something you're working on likely to preventing >240 cols?
No, not at all.
> Just worth documenting what you see at this stage.
I'll keep my eyes open :-)
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-12-21 19:05:59 | Re: CLOG contention |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-12-21 18:59:26 | Re: bghinter process |