Re: Anyone see a need for BTItem/HashItem?

I'm considering getting rid of the BTItem/BTItemData and
HashItem/HashItemData struct definitions and just referencing
IndexTuple(Data) directly in the btree and hash AMs.  It appears that
at one time in the forgotten past, there was some access-method-specific
data in index entries in addition to the common IndexTuple struct, but
that's been gone for a long time and I can't see a reason why either of
these AMs would resurrect it.  So this just seems like extra notational
cruft to me, as well as an extra layer of palloc overhead (see eg
_bt_formitem()).  GIST already got rid of this concept, or never had it.

Does anyone see a reason to keep this layer of struct definitions?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster