Re: type info refactoring
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-10-31T17:01:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: > ... I assumed that TypeInfo would be > embedded in other structs directly, rather than a pointer and palloc. Yeah, that would avoid the extra-pallocs complaint, although it might be notationally a bit of a PITA in places like equalfuncs.c. I think that would end up needing a separate COMPARE_TYPEINFO_FIELD macro instead of being able to treat it like a Node* field. But I'm still wondering whether it's smart to try to promote all of this fundamentally-auxiliary information to first-class status. It's really unclear to me that that will end up being a net win either conceptually or notationally. regards, tom lane