From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Manipulating complex types as non-contiguous structures in-memory |
Date: | 2015-02-14 17:53:58 |
Message-ID: | 7355.1423936438@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>>> The words that sprung to mind for me were: packed/unpacked.
>> Trouble is that we're already using "packed" with a specific connotation
>> in that same area of the code, namely for short-header varlena values.
>> (See pg_detoast_datum_packed() etc.) So I don't think this will work.
>> But maybe a different adjective?
> expanded?
That seems to work from the standpoint of not conflicting with other
nearby usages in our code, and it's got the right semantics I think.
Any other suggestions out there? Otherwise I'll probably go with this.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-02-14 17:56:03 | Re: "multiple backends attempting to wait for pincount 1" |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-02-14 17:42:13 | Re: New CF app deployment |