| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: GiST header cleanup |
| Date: | 2005-05-17 03:37:23 |
| Message-ID: | 428966F3.2000208@samurai.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Patch applied.
Tom Lane wrote:
> One objection: I think the GiST amproc numbers (GIST_CONSISTENT_PROC
> and friends) *are* part of the API and should be in the public header,
> even if they happen not to be used by any C code at the moment.
Ok, I've moved these back to gist.h
> GISTNStrategies seems inherently bogus, since there's no essential limit
> on the number of strategies in a gist index. I'd get rid of it.
Done.
> The "100" in pg_am.h is pretty nasty too, because it is on the one hand
> theoretically insufficient and on the other hand in practice way too
> much.
Yeah, I agree this is pretty ugly, but I'm not planning to fix it any
time soon, either...
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mahmoud Taghizadeh | 2005-05-17 05:10:52 | Faarsi FAQ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-17 02:36:14 | Re: GiST header cleanup |