Re: Simple Column reordering - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Simple Column reordering
Date
Msg-id 200702261620.l1QGKJA03363@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Simple Column reordering  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Simple Column reordering  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Re: Simple Column reordering  ("Simon Riggs" <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
I realized this proposal has been withdrawn, but the fact the proposal
even illicited comments exploring it requires me to comment.

Folks, how can we entertain ideas that would break SELECT * and
no-column-list INSERTs for a small performance boost?  If there was no
other way to get the performance boost, and the features was rarely
used, we might consider such a change, but neither is true in this case.

My point is that this proposal is so far away from our acceptable
criteria that I am worried about how people are analyzing proposals.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simon Riggs wrote:
> Column storage position is the subject of many long threads in recent
> times. Solutions proposed for this have been both fairly complex and
> long enough that nothing seems likely to happen for 8.3. If I'm wrong,
> then of course this proposal would be superceded.
> 
> I propose that at CREATE TABLE time, the column ordering is re-ordered
> so that the table columns are packed more efficiently. This would be a
> physical re-ordering, so that SELECT * and COPY without explicit column
> definitions would differ from the original CREATE TABLE statement.
> 
> This would be an optional feature, off by default, controlled by a
> USERSET GUC
>     optimize_column_order = off (default) | on
> 
> When the full column ordering proposal is implemented,
> optimize_column_ordering would be set to default to on. The feature
> would be supported for at least one more release after this to allow bug
> analysis.
> 
> The proposed ordering would be:
> 1. All fixed length columns, arranged so that alignment is efficient
> 2. All variable length columns
> 
> All column ordering would stay as close as possible to original order
> 
> No changes would be made apart from at CREATE TABLE time.
> 
> The ordering would be repeatable, so that the order would not change on
> repeated dump/restore of a table with no changes.
> 
> -- 
>   Simon Riggs             
>   EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>          http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007)
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Simple Column reordering