Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families
Date: 2012-01-25 20:52:59
Message-ID: 1327524700-sup-5905@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié ene 25 17:32:49 -0300 2012:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > New version that repairs a defective test case.
>
> Committed. I don't find this to be particularly good style:
>
> + for (i = 0; i < old_natts && ret; i++)
> + ret = (!IsPolymorphicType(get_opclass_input_type(classObjectId[i
> + irel->rd_att->attrs[i]->atttypid == typeObjectId[i]);
>
> ...but I am not sure whether we have any formal policy against it, so
> I just committed it as-is for now. I would have surrounded the loop
> with an if (ret) block and written the body of the loop as if
> (condition) { ret = false; break; }.

I find that code way too clever.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Boley 2012-01-25 20:53:39 Re: some longer, larger pgbench tests with various performance-related patches
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2012-01-25 20:50:09 Re: GUC_REPORT for protocol tunables was: Re: Optimize binary serialization format of arrays with fixed size elements