Re: Binary in/out for aclitem
Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
From: Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-02-24T20:02:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- aclitem_binary_20110224.patch (text/x-patch) patch
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> Wednesday 23 February 2011 22:30:04 > =?utf-8?q?Rados=C5=82aw_Smogura?= <rsmogura@softperience.eu> writes: > > Here is extended version, has version field (N_ACL_RIGHTS*2) and reserved > > mask, as well definition is more general then def of PGSQL. In any way it > > require that rights mades bit array. > > You're going in quite the wrong direction here. The consensus as I > understood it was that we should just use the text representation in > binary mode too, rather than inventing a separate representation that's > going to put a whole new set of constraints on what can happen to the > internal representation. The proposal you have here has no redeeming > social value whatever, because nobody cares about the I/O efficiency > for aclitem (and even if anyone did, you've made no case that this would > actually be more efficient to use on the client side). > > regards, tom lane Look at it. Pass call to in/out. Regards, Radek