Hi,
On 2018-08-06 10:08:24 +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> I think, I explained why getattr() needs to be a separate callback.
> There's a reason why slot_getattr() more code than just calling
> slot_getsomeattrs() and return the required one - the cases when the
> requested attribute is NULL or is missing from a tuple. Depending
> upon the tuple layout access to a simple attribute can be optimized
> without spending cycles to extract attributes prior to that one.
> Columnar store (I haven't seen Haribabu's patch), for example, stores
> columns from multiple rows together and thus doesn't have a compact
> version of tuple. In such cases extracting an individual attribute
> directly is far cheaper than extracting all the previous attributes.
OTOH, it means we continually access the null bitmap instead of just
tts_isnull[i].
Your logic about not deforming columns in this case would hold for *any*
deforming of previous columns as well. That's an optimization that we
probably want to implement at some point (e.g. by building a bitmap of
needed columns in the planner), but I don't think we should do it
together with this already large patchset.
> Why should we force the storage API to extract all the attributes in
> such a case?
Because there's no need yet, and it complicates the API without
corresponding benefit.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
