On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:42:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> >> If there was a mechanism to obtain
> >> field widths from the catalog there would be no need to store the
> >> field width in each tuple. This would be useful for other types as
> >> well (UUID and ENUM, for example).
> > I don't think there is concensus on adding that.
I seem to recall it coming up a few times in recent history, but
consider this a call for people to "+1" it.

> Well, it's pie-in-the-sky at the moment because we have no credible
> design for doing it.  Whether any given proposal would get accepted
> would depend on what its downsides were.
> Do we (or should we) have a TODO section for "blue sky research
> ideas"?  I'd not object to putting an item like this in such a
> section.  But for most of the TODO items we have a reasonably clear
> idea of what we're talking about, so this doesn't seem to belong
> in with the rest.

It seems what's desired is fairly clear (even if my proposed TODO
wasn't)... have a means for types that do not contain varlena info but
aren't pre-compiled to a fixed width like int is.

Of course, how to do it is a whole different story. I thought that there
was precident for putting items like that on the TODO, but maybe not.
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to