From: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Антуан Виолин <violin(dot)antuan(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Sort functions with specialized comparators |
Date: | 2025-01-04 18:15:27 |
Message-ID: | 4DBEDEBB-D3C5-4516-A453-4F6F12F28DD9@yandex-team.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 4 Jan 2025, at 10:24, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> v6-0001:
>
> +static int
> +unique_cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
> +{
> + int32 aval = *((const int32 *) a);
> + int32 bval = *((const int32 *) b);
> +
> + return pg_cmp_s32(aval, bval);
> +}
>
> I'm not sure it makes sense to create a whole new function for this,
> when the same patch removed:
>
> -int
> -compASC(const void *a, const void *b)
> -{
> - return pg_cmp_s32(*(const int32 *) a, *(const int32 *) b);
> -}
>
> ...which in effect the exact same thing.
>
> Otherwise seems close to committable.
I thought about it, but decided to rename the routine.
Here's a version 7 with compASC().
And, just in case, if we already have ASC, why not keep DESC too instead of newly invented cmp function :) PFA v8.
Thanks!
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v7-0001-Use-specialized-sort-facilities.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.9 KB |
v8-0001-Use-specialized-sort-facilities.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-01-04 19:35:47 | Re: Using Expanded Objects other than Arrays from plpgsql |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2025-01-04 16:58:36 | Re: Parallel CREATE INDEX for GIN indexes |