Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
Date
Msg-id c929a9650f57e0bd908f5e8d540a62702455a9bc.camel@j-davis.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2021-05-03 at 10:38 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I don't think it's much good to just do that. You probably need a
> full
> 64-bits for something like a column store. But that's all you need.

I would definitely like that for citus columnar, and it would
definitely make it easier to manage the address space, but I won't
demand it today. 48 bits is a workable tuple address space for many
purposes, especially when you factor in logical partitioning.

I will be dealing with gaps though, so wasting 5 bits of address space
(2^16 / MaxOffsetNumber = 32) to bring it down to 43 bits is not great.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: MaxOffsetNumber for Table AMs
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers