Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3
От
Gregory Stark
Тема
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3
Дата
Msg-id
87wsugngl3.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Ответ на
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 (Tom Lane)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
"Tom Lane" writes: "Tom Lane" writes: > Gregory Stark writes: > >> I think we also should move the NumericData and declaration to numeric.c and >> make the Numeric type an opaque pointer for the rest of the source >> tree. > > I don't agree with that; we are not in the habit of doing it that way > for any other on-disk data type. All it will accomplish is to force > people to make private copies of the struct declaration, thereby > entirely guaranteeing that they fail to track changes. There will > always be legitimate reasons for external code to want to look at > on-disk bits. Well the macros to do so would become quite a bit more complex. I imagine they would become functions instead. I suppose a reasonable simple interface could be ginned up. But anyone currently accessing the data directly would have to go through the functions to access the bits. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления