Re: pg_class catalog question...

On Apr 2, 2006, at 6:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On 4/2/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> If you're expecting that you'll be able to write BYTEA(n) and avoid
>>> storing a length word, you'll find that it's not a trivial matter.
>
>> It may not be trivial, but it's certainly not impossible.
>
> A word to the wise is sufficient: function result types don't have
> known typmods, and for the most part expression results don't either.
> Changing that is not "impossible", but the level of pain vastly
> exceeds
> what this feature would be worth. And that's not even the only
> problem.
>
> If you're desperate to have something like this, you could create one
> or more fixed-size datatypes (ie, with various positive typlen
> values).
> But I don't see a practical way to use a typmod in determining the
> physical width.

I'm not sure how other databases handle this, but I suspect it would
be OK performance-wise to tack on a length byte for these types when
dealing with functions and anything else that isn't directly tied to
a table where you can easily get length info from the catalog.

Actually, how is this handled with varchar(x)?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461