| From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Get rid of system attributes in pg_attribute? |
| Date: | 2005-02-22 18:42:59 |
| Message-ID: | 421B7D33.3080700@pse-consulting.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
>
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>>it still seems like we don't have to represent these columns explicitly
>>>in pg_attribute.
>
>
>>Hm, technically you might be right. Still, I like pgAdmin3 to show that
>>columns (when "show system objects" is enabled) for teaching purposes,
>>so users/newbies browsing the objects will learn "hey, there are some
>>reserved columns, they could have some meaning".
>
>
> Not unreasonable, but is it worth a factor of 2 in the size of
> pg_attribute?
Do we need to save space? On a DB with quite some tables I have
pg_attribute size=7.5MB, pg_class size 5.8MB (13166 pg_attribute rows
total, 5865 system columns, most tables without oids). This doesn't seem
unacceptable big to me.
Regards,
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-22 18:44:23 | Re: int64/double for time/timestamp |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-22 18:33:02 | Re: Question about "Unrecognized SPI code" ... |