Re: More Tuple Madness - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Richards
Subject Re: More Tuple Madness
Date
Msg-id 054801c06858$01660d90$0200a8c0@digitallis
Whole thread Raw
In response to More Tuple Madness  ("Michael Richards" <miker@interchange.ca>)
Responses Re: More Tuple Madness  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Oops, I guess I assumed that the alignment part was directly related to the
number of bytes until the next attribute rather than the actual alignment.

Is there any need for documentation on how this whole storage thing works?
I'd be more than willing to write it up.

-Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Michael Richards" <miker@interchange.ca>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More Tuple Madness


> "Michael Richards" <miker@interchange.ca> writes:
> > The alignment seems to be wrong for type CHAR(1):
>
> No, the alignment is fine.  A field's align constraint says where it has
> to start, not where the next field has to start.  gender starts on a
> 4-byte boundary and is 5 bytes long, then we have one byte wasted for
> alignment of yearofbirth, then yearofbirth starts on a 2-byte boundary.
> Everyone's happy.
>
> regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: pg_dumpall --accounts-only
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Table name scope (was Re: [BUGS] Outer joins aren't working with views)