On 2013-11-21 08:22:05 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> > WRT performance: I agree that fixed-width identifiers are more > >> > performant, that's why I went for them, but I am not sure it's that > >> > important. The performance sensitive parts should all be done using the > >> > internal id the identifier maps to, not the public one. > >> > >> But I thought the internal identifier was exactly what we're creating. > > > > Sure. But how often are we a) going to create such an identifier b) > > looking it up? > > Never. Make that the replication solution's problem. Make the core > support deal only with UUIDs or pairs of 64-bit integers or something > like that, and let the replication solution decide what they mean.
I think we're misunderstanding each other. I was commenting on your fear that strings longer than NAMEDATALEN or something would be bad for performance - which I don't think is very relevant because the lookups from "public" to "internal" identifier shouldn't be in any performance critical path. I personally would prefer a string because it'd allow me to build an identifier using the criterions I'd originally outlined outside of this infrastructure. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
