Re: Building infrastructure for B-Tree deduplication that recognizes when opclass equality is also equivalence

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Building infrastructure for B-Tree deduplication that recognizes when opclass equality is also equivalence
Date: 2019-12-24 17:35:38
Message-ID: 2880.1577208938@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Am I the only one bothered by the fact that this patch (and all
> downstream discussion) reduces the term "bitwise equality" to simply
> "bitwise"? It reads really strange to me, both in the resulting SQL
> grammar as well as in struct names, code comments etc. "This operator
> class is bitwise."

I agree, that's really poor English.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-12-24 17:42:11 Re: unsupportable composite type partition keys
Previous Message Alexey Kondratov 2019-12-24 17:12:32 Physical replication slot advance is not persistent