Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writablevariables) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writablevariables)
Date
Msg-id 201901091953.p3k2mqdwq5jk@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Jan-09, Tom Lane wrote:

> We could make the index table still smaller if we wanted to reassign
> a couple dozen high-numbered functions down to lower OIDs, but I dunno
> if it's worth the trouble.  It certainly isn't from a performance
> standpoint, because those unused entry ranges will never be touched
> in normal usage; but it'd make the server executable a couple KB smaller.

Or two couples KB smaller, if we abandoned the idea that pg_proc OIDs
must not collide with those in any other catalog, and we renumbered all
functions to start at OID 1 or so.  duplicate_oids would complain about
that, though, I suppose ... and nobody who has ever hardcoded a function
OID would love this idea much.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writablevariables)