Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)

>>>>> "John" == John Naylor <jcnaylor(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

> On 12/18/18, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I'd be kind of inclined to convert all uses of ScanKeyword to the
>> new way, if only for consistency's sake. On the other hand, I'm not
>> the one volunteering to do the work.

John> That's reasonable, as long as the design is nailed down first.
John> Along those lines, attached is a heavily WIP patch that only
John> touches plpgsql unreserved keywords, to test out the new
John> methodology in a limited area. After settling APIs and
John> name/directory bikeshedding, I'll move on to the other four
John> keyword types.

Is there any particular reason not to go further and use a perfect hash
function for the lookup, rather than binary search?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)