Re: [HACKERS] Re: [DOCS] Re: FE/BE protocol revision patch

>
> Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Zero overhead for types that don't use it is meaningless, because the
> > varlena length is 4 bytes, while current atttypmod is only two. Second,
> > I don't see how a varlena makes atttypmod less type-specific.
>
> Well, the issue is making sure that it will be adequate for future
> datatypes that we can't foresee.
>
> I can see that a variable-size atttypmod might be a tad painful to
> support. If you don't want to go that far, a reasonable compromise
> would be to make it int4 instead of int2. int2 is already uncomfortably
> tight for the numeric/decimal datatypes, which we surely will want to
> support soon (at least I do ;-)). int4 should give a little breathing
> room for datatypes that need to encode more than one subfield into
> atttypmod.

Comments? I am willing to change it.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)