Re: Is 7.3 a good time to increase NAMEDATALEN ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Is 7.3 a good time to increase NAMEDATALEN ?
Date
Msg-id 20850.1022039398@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is 7.3 a good time to increase NAMEDATALEN ?  ("Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes:
> I'm sure that this is an idiotic thing to say, but why not just make it
> varchar?

The main reason NAME is a fixed-length datatype is that we'd have to
rewrite (and make slower) a lot of catalog-accessing code that expects
to be able to access other fields in catalog tuples at fixed offsets.
I do not think it's worth it.

Also, the existing performance bottlenecks look to me to be associated
with assumptions that NAME is fixed-length.  To convert to varlena NAME,
we'd still have to fix all that code.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: Timestamp & Interval - Part 1
Next
From: Oliver Elphick
Date:
Subject: Re: Redhat 7.3 time manipulation bug