| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Mark Cave-Ayland <mark(dot)cave-ayland(at)siriusit(dot)co(dot)uk>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [CFReview] Red-Black Tree |
| Date: | 2010-02-09 03:43:08 |
| Message-ID: | 6895.1265686988@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> It seems a bit strange to have all the rb_free_recursive support and not
>> use it anywhere ... and a freefunc callback even, whose only caller
>> seems to set as null currently. Hmm, even in the knngist patch the
>> rb_freefunc stuff is unused.
> I don't think it's inappropriate; it doesn't seem implausible that
> someone might want to free an rbtree someday. I suppose we could
> comment it out but I guess I don't see the point.
I think the suggestion was to *remove* it not comment it out. I'm
skeptical of carrying dead code. If the functionality is not used
in the proposed gist patches then it's very fair to question whether
it ever will be used.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2010-02-09 04:01:53 | Re: set the cost of an aggregate function |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-02-09 03:38:39 | Re: CVS checkout source code for different branches |