Re: tid_blockno() and tid_offset() accessor functions

Hi,

Thanks for the review!

Attaching a patch with all document changes, removed the cross-reference to
datatype-oid entirely. I've moved the &func-tid; entry in func.sgml to
directly follow &func-textsearch;, which fits better alphabetically, and
reworded the introductory paragraph to be much more concise, directly
pointing to the table.

Regards,
Ayush

On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 at 23:24, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2026-03-13 18:08:04 +0100, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> > As for naming; I'd personally prefer to have 'heap' included in the
> > names here (e.g. heaptid_blkno(tid) or heap_blkno[_of](tid)), because
> > not all AMs may map tid.blkno exactly to a block number in the main
> > fork. While PostgreSQL (in core) currently only knows about the heap
> > AM, we should probably keep clear of pretending that all tableAMs
> > produce TIDs that behave exactly like heap's do.
>
> Meh. As long as tids themselves are split like they are, without any
> variability of the amount of space dedicated for either component, I don't
> see
> any advantage in that.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund
>