Re: gsoc, text search selectivity and dllist enhancments

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Jan Urbański <j(dot)urbanski(at)students(dot)mimuw(dot)edu(dot)pl>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: gsoc, text search selectivity and dllist enhancments
Date: 2008-07-14 05:06:43
Message-ID: 22836.1216012003@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Isn't the vacuum_delay_point() good enough?

> But that's in the outer loop ... I mean here:

You'd need one heckuva lot of lexemes in a tsvector to make that
important. Do we have CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in any other loops
over tsvector contents? I kinda doubt it ...

(I have no real objection to adding CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS there,
I'm just questioning the value.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2008-07-14 06:37:36 Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-07-14 05:01:20 Re: gsoc, text search selectivity and dllist enhancments