Re: [HACKERS] Max size of data types and tuples. (fwd) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From darrenk@insightdist.com (Darren King)
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Max size of data types and tuples. (fwd)
Date
Msg-id 9801120204.AA39168@ceodev
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] Max size of data types and tuples. (fwd)  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Max size of data types and tuples. (fwd)  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>
> Here's a blast from the past.  Shows how I keep those open issues in my
> mailbox.
>
> Forwarded message:
> > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:38:10 -0500
> > From: aixssd!darrenk@abs.net (Darren King)
> > To: hackers@postgreSQL.org
> > Subject: [HACKERS] Max size of data types and tuples.

Still buried in my 'received' box here too.  Can't imagine all the bugs
and/or issues you have kept in yours.


> > 1.  Clean up the #defines for the max block size.  Currently,
> > there are at least four references to 8192...

Think I found and fixed all of these up.


> > __These includes of storage/bufpage.h can be removed.__

Still _quite_ a few #includes that can be removed throughout.  First,
"utils/elog.h" and "util/palloc.h" are include in "postgres.h", so are
unnecessary to include by themselves since "postgres.h" is include in
_every_ .c file, correct?

Also numerous #includes of "storage/bufpage.h" and "storage/fd.h" that are
unnecessary since the things they were included for (BLCKSZ and SEEK_*) are
now either in "config.h" or found in a system include file.


> > 2.  Once the block size issue is taken care of, calculate the
> > maximum tuple size more accurately.
...
> > 3.  When #1 & #2 are resolved, let the textual fields have a max
> > of (MAX_TUPLE_SIZE - sizeof(int)).

This could be done as soon as I come up with a way of defining the packet
size for the interfaces since this is the newest limiting factor.

Peter's suggestion of backend functions for getting info might be the way to
go.  It would let the various interfaces get the info they need and would be
a step towards JDBC and ODBC compliance.

darrenk

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: New pg_pwd patch and stuff
Next
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] grant still broken