Re: Move pg_attribute.attcompression to earlier in struct for reduced size?

Hi,

On 2021-05-17 17:06:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Putting it just after attalign seems like a reasonably sane choice
> from the standpoint of grouping things affecting physical storage;
> and as you say, that wins from the standpoint of using up alignment
> padding rather than adding more.

Makes sense to me.


> Personally I'd think the most consistent order in that area would
> be attbyval, attalign, attstorage, attcompression; but perhaps it's
> too late to swap the order of attstorage and attalign.

Given that we've put in new fields in various positions on a fairly
regular basis, I don't think swapping around attalign, attstorage would
cause a meaningful amount of additional pain.  Personally I don't have a
preference for how these are ordered.

Greetings,

Andres Freund