<br /><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">IIRC, what was being talked about was shoehorning some hint bits into<br
/>the line pointers by assuming that size and offset are multiples of 4.<br /> I'm not thrilled with having mutable
statusbits there for reliability<br /> reasons, but it could be done without breaking a lot of existing code.<br />
WhatI was reacting to above was a suggestion that we could delete the<br /> itempointer size field altogether, which
seemsunworkable for the<br /> reasons I mentioned.<br /></blockquote></div><br />I think then we can pursue on using
theIndexTuple structure similar to HeapTuple(as you have suggested in an earlier update). This would involve(i
believe)<br/>a) Making the current IndexTuple into IndexTupleHeader<br /> b) Creating a new structure called
IndexTuplewhich will store the size and the have a pointer to IndexTupleHeader. <br /><br />But Tom, can you please
explainme why that broken ordering example doesn't affect the current index scans. <br /><br />Thanks,<br />Gokul.<br
/>