From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Datum as struct |
Date: | 2025-08-09 13:04:35 |
Message-ID: | 2259624.1754744675@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
> On 08.08.25 22:30, Andres Freund wrote:
>> One thing that would be an interesting follow-up would be to make the struct
>> not just carry the datum, but also the type of the field, to be filled in by
>> tuple deforming and the *GetDatum() functions. Then we could assert that the
>> correct DatumGet*() functions are used. I think that'd allow us to detect a
>> rather large number of issues that we currently aren't finding
> That would make Datum >=9 bytes? Is that something we would need to
> worry about in terms of performance?
It'd have to be a cassert-like option, not something you'd enable in
production.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2025-08-09 13:33:31 | Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently] |
Previous Message | Mihail Nikalayeu | 2025-08-09 12:55:00 | Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently] |