Re: get rid of RM_HEAP2_ID

On 15/10/2025 07:51, John Naylor wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 7:20 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
>> This patch consumes one of the padding bytes. That's not entirely free,
>> as there is an opportunity cost: we could squeeze out the padding bytes
>> and save 2 bytes on every WAL record instead.
> 
> I must be misunderstanding, because I'm not sure how that would work
> with the alignment requirement of later parts.

We could store xl_crc unaligned. IIRC all the structs that follow that 
are already stored unaligned.

- Heikki