Re: alter table drop column status
От | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD |
---|---|
Тема | Re: alter table drop column status |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA41EB4FC@m0114.s-mxs.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | alter table drop column status (Kovacs Zoltan <kovacsz@pc10.radnoti-szeged.sulinet.hu>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> Another objection is the need to add an OID field to tuple headers; 4 > more bytes per tuple adds up (and on some platforms it'd be 8 bytes due > to alignment considerations). How about only allowing one version per page, this is how Informix does it. Imho separating in memory tuple representation from on disk tuple representation would be a good thing anyway. While you need to align certain things in memory there is no need to align on disk stuff. This would potentially save a lot of diskspace. I know a lot of people say disk space is cheap, but the issue is that IO is slow. It would also open the door to features like compressing datapages like RDB does. We have calculated here that porting six ~750 Gb databases from rdb to some other db would need ~4 times the disk space. Andreas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: