On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 05:04:48PM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> This tree has a different direction than is usual, and then replacing the
> root node is not simple.
Yeah, it is not like we should redesign this whole part just for the
feature discussed here, and that may impact performance as the current
list handling is cheap now.
> Second solution (significantly more simple) is an additional pointer in
> ns_item structure. In almost all cases this pointer will not be used.
> Because ns_item uses a flexible array, then union cannot be used. I
> implemented this in a patch marked as "alias-implementation".
>
> What do you think about it?
I am not sure that it is necessary nor good to replace entirely the
root label. So associating a new field directly into it sounds like a
promising approach?
--
Michael