From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Quan Zongliang <quanzongliang@yeah.net>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Change the bool member of the Query structure to bits
In-reply-to: <d05a1c87-82e9-49a3-a4e2-e0d2b38b2e8b@yeah.net>
References: <d05a1c87-82e9-49a3-a4e2-e0d2b38b2e8b@yeah.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Quan Zongliang <quanzongliang@yeah.net>
	message dated "Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:07:46 +0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <184952.1708443951.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 10:45:51 -0500
Message-ID: <184953.1708443951@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/184953.1708443951%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Quan Zongliang <quanzongliang@yeah.net> writes:
> The Query structure has an increasing number of bool attributes. This is 
> likely to increase in the future. And they have the same properties. 
> Wouldn't it be better to store them in bits? Common statements don't use 
> them, so they have little impact. This also saves memory space.

I'm -1 on that, for three reasons:

* The amount of space saved is quite negligible.  If queries had many
Query structs then it could matter, but they don't.

* This causes enough code churn to create a headache for back-patching.

* This'll completely destroy the readability of these flags in
pprint output.

I'm not greatly in love with the macro layer you propose, either,
but those details don't matter because I think we should just
leave well enough alone.

			regards, tom lane