Re: Binary search in ScalarArrayOpExpr for OR'd constant arrays

From: James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Binary search in ScalarArrayOpExpr for OR'd constant arrays
Date: 2020-04-27 12:40:15
Message-ID: CAAaqYe9ZPeFxw126uao4KgAXPO_Exr6t8zeNLSDcXdEf93m53A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 11:44 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 15:12, James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > While working on this I noticed that dynahash.c line 499 has this assertion:
> >
> > Assert(info->entrysize >= info->keysize);
> >
> > Do you by any chance know why the entry would need to be larger than the key?
>
> Larger or equal. They'd be equal if you the key was the data, since
> you do need to store at least the key. Looking at the code for
> examples where dynahash is used in that situation, I see
> _hash_finish_split().

Ah, I was thinking of it as key and value being separate sizes added
together rather than one including the other.

Thanks,
James

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-04-27 12:49:41 Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Previous Message Jonathan S. Katz 2020-04-27 12:34:20 Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?