On 10/6/16, Serge Rielau <serge@rielau.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> BTW, it also occurs to me that there are going to be good implementation
>> reasons for restricting it to be a hard constant, not any sort of
>> expression. We are likely to need to be able to insert the value in
>> low-level code where general expression evaluation is impractical.
>>
> Yes, the padding must happen primarily in the getAttr() routines.
> Clearly we do not want to evaluate an expression there.
> But what speaks against evaluating the expression before we store it?
> After all we seem to all agree that this only works if the expression
> computes to the same constant all the time.
>
> If we do not want to store an “untyped” datum straight in pg_attribute as a
> BYTEA (my current approach)
Ough. I made a mistake about pg_attribute because I forgot about the pg_attrdef.
If we do not merge these tables, the pg_attrdef is the best place to
store evaluated expression as a constant the same way defaults are
stored in adbin.
> we could store the pretty printed version of the constant
It is a wrong way. It ruins commands like "ALTER COLUMN ... TYPE ... USING"
> and evaluate that when we build the tuple descriptor.
> This happens when we load the relation into the relcache.
>
> Anyway, I’m jumping ahead and it’s perhaps best to let the code speak for
> itself once I have the WIP patch ready so we have something concrete to
> discuss
--
Best regards,
Vitaly Burovoy
