| From: | Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Matsumura, Ryo" <matsumura(dot)ryo(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PROPOSAL]a new data type 'bytea' for ECPG |
| Date: | 2019-02-12 14:06:11 |
| Message-ID: | 7b727b360c78833d3e1e2e97d921aefe1ff0f5f3.camel@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Matsumura-san,
> I try to explain as follows. I would like to receive your comment.
> ...
I'm afraid I don't really understand your explanation. Why is handling
a bytea so different from handling a varchar? I can see some
differences due to its binary nature, but I do not understand why it
needs so much special handling for stuff like its length? There is a
length field in the structure but instead of using it the data field is
used to store both, the length and the data. What am I missing?
Please keep in mind that I did not write the descriptor code, so I may
very well not see the obvious.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
Jabber: michael at xmpp dot meskes dot org
VfL Borussia! Força Barça! SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2019-02-12 15:08:25 | Bloom index cost model seems to be wrong |
| Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2019-02-12 14:05:01 | Re: libpq compression |