On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > ISTM that we would get the effect your looking for by just moving the
> > xl_tot_len field to the end, and only storing it for records with backup
> > blocks:
>
> I like that formulation better --- seems like less
> change-for-the-sake-of-change.
Will do.
-- Simon Riggs EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com