| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: SendRowDescriptionMessage() is slow for queries with a lot of columns |
| Date: | 2017-09-28 05:23:45 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQ-K8m1UC3J00MPHFZN5oK5Hw1_EVhSyWztHmY974OJ+w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On September 27, 2017 9:06:49 PM PDT, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>>On 2017-09-28 00:01:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Could we please not perpetuate the brain-dead "s" and "l" suffixes
>>> on these names? Given the lack of standardization as to how long
>>> "long" is, that's entirely unhelpful. I'd be fine with names like
>>> pg_ntoh16/32/64 and pg_hton16/32/64.
>>
>>Yes. I'd polled a few people and they leaned towards those. But I'm
>>perfectly happy to do that renaming.
>
> If somebody wants to argue for replacing hton/ntoh with {to,from}big or *be, now's the time.
OK. pg_hton16/32/64 and pg_ntoh16/32/64 are fine enough IMO.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Noah Misch | 2017-09-28 05:31:23 | Re: Shaky coding for vacuuming partitioned relations |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2017-09-28 05:23:26 | Re: pgbench - minor fix for meta command only scripts |