Re: HOT synced with HEAD

On 9/16/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Attached is as far as I've gotten with reviewing the HOT patch; I see
> that Pavan is still fooling with it so we'd better re-sync.

I am done with most of the items on my plate. I was not sure how
far you have gone with the patch, so was trying to finish as many
items as possible myself. Now that I know you have started refactoring
the code, I would try not to change it unless its urgent. And when its
required, I will send a add-on patch just the way I did earlier.

Let me know if you want me to focus of something at this point.

> * Many API cleanups, in particular I didn't like what had been done
> to heap_fetch and thought it better to split out the chain-following
> logic

I liked those changes. I am wondering if we could have avoided
duplicating the chain following code in heap_hot_search_buffer and
index_getnext. But I trust your judgment.

I also liked the way you reverted the API changes to various index build
methods.

I would test the patch tomorrow in detail.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com