| From: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Redundant Result node |
| Date: | 2024-08-27 11:26:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAEudQAqrO-qyMuOHJcPp4L4wLJtOuOSEduHVkfLexMTc+AC05g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em ter., 27 de ago. de 2024 às 00:43, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
escreveu:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 9:02 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Em qui., 22 de ago. de 2024 às 04:34, Richard Guo <
> guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> escreveu:
> >> This does not seem right to me, as PathTargets are not canonical, so
> >> we cannot guarantee that two identical PathTargets will have the same
> >> pointer. Actually, for the query above, the two PathTargets are
> >> identical but have different pointers.
> >
> > Could memcmp solve this?
>
> Hmm, I don't think memcmp works for nodes that contain pointers.
>
The first case which memcmp can fail is if both pointers are null.
But considering the current behavior, the cost vs benefit favors memcmp.
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Jones | 2024-08-27 11:57:24 | Re: [PATCH] Add CANONICAL option to xmlserialize |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-08-27 11:16:25 | Re: Parallel CREATE INDEX for GIN indexes |