From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Lookup penalty for VARIADIC patch |
Date: | 2008-07-16 03:33:42 |
Message-ID: | 4274.1216179222@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> On Jul 15, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There are two ways we
>> could do it: a bool column that is TRUE if the function is variadic,
>> or an oid column that is the variadic array's element type, or zero
>> if the function isn't variadic. The second would take more space but
>> would avoid having to do a catalog lookup to get the element type in
>> the case that the function is indeed variadic. I'm leaning to the
>> second way but wanted to know if anyone objected?
> If you go the second route, I'd vote for it being NULL if the
> function isn't variadic, unless that would play hell with the C side
> of the catalog code...
Getting rid of the check for null is *exactly* the point here --- AFAICT
that's what's eating all the time in the existing code.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sushant Sinha | 2008-07-16 03:54:01 | Re: [GENERAL] Fragments in tsearch2 headline |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-16 03:26:18 | Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3 |