Re: Binary in/out for aclitem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Binary in/out for aclitem
Date
Msg-id 7177.1298496604@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Binary in/out for aclitem  (Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>)
Responses Re: Binary in/out for aclitem  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
Re: Binary in/out for aclitem  (Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>)
List pgsql-hackers
Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu> writes:
> Here is extended version, has version field (N_ACL_RIGHTS*2) and reserved 
> mask, as well definition is more general then def of PGSQL. In any way it 
> require that rights mades bit array.

You're going in quite the wrong direction here.  The consensus as I
understood it was that we should just use the text representation in
binary mode too, rather than inventing a separate representation that's
going to put a whole new set of constraints on what can happen to the
internal representation.  The proposal you have here has no redeeming
social value whatever, because nobody cares about the I/O efficiency
for aclitem (and even if anyone did, you've made no case that this would
actually be more efficient to use on the client side).
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Binary in/out for aclitem
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Possible substitute for PostmasterIsAlive polling loops