Thread

  1. 1-byte id for SharedInvalidationMessages

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2010-08-10T01:54:15Z

    On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
    >> Do you think it's worth worrying about the reduction in the number of
    >> possible SI message types?
    >
    > IIRC the number of message types is the number of catalog caches plus
    > half a dozen or so.  We're a long way from exhausting even a 1-byte
    > ID field; and we could play more games if we had to, since there would
    > be a padding byte free in the message types that refer to a catalog
    > cache.  IOW, 1-byte id doesn't bother me.
    
    I took a look at what is required to implement $SUBJECT tonight and it
    appears to be remarkably straightforward.  I suppose this qualifies as
    a reason to increment WAL_PAGE_MAGIC, since SharedInvalidationMessages
    are now xlogged; and I added an Assert() to
    AddCatCacheInvalidationMessage to detect overruns of the id field, but
    other than that it seems to be just a matter of s/int16/int8/ in a
    handful of places.
    
    For those following along at home:
    
    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-07/msg00355.php [the
    patch for which this is a prerequisite]
    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-08/msg00366.php [why
    it needs it]
    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-08/msg00425.php [how
    this helps]
    
    Thoughts?
    
    -- 
    Robert Haas
    EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
    The Enterprise Postgres Company