* Andres Freund (and...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > Currently on a little endian system the pglz header contains the length > in the first four bytes as: > [dddddddd][dddddddd][dddddddd][xxdddddd] > Where dd are valid length bits for pglz and xx are the two bits which > are always zero since we only ever store up to 1GB. We can redefine 'xx' > to mean whatever we want but we cannot change it's place.
I'm not thrilled with the idea of using those 2 bits from the length
integer. I understand the point of it and that we'd be able to have
binary compatibility from it but is it necessary to track at the
per-tuple level..? What about possibly supporting >1GB objects at some
point (yes, I know there's a lot of other issues there, but still).
We've also got complexity around the size of the length integer already.
Anyway, just not 100% sure that we really want to use these bits for
this.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
