From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |
Date: | 2015-01-21 22:33:40 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZR-1+To-tujJ8DGf444rGBhbqfpCAO7Rf_003sYwZxX6w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> Okay, then. I concede the point: We should support the datum case as
> you outline, since it is simpler than any alternative. It probably
> won't even be necessary to formalize the idea that finished
> abbreviated keys must be pass-by-value (at least not for the benefit
> of this functionality); if someone writes an opclass that generates
> pass-by-reference abbreviated keys (I think that might actually make
> sense, although I'm being imaginative), it simply won't work for the
> datum sort case, which is probably fine.
I mean that a restriction formally preventing use of abbreviation with
pass-by-value types isn't necessary. That was something that I thought
we'd have to document as a restriction (for the benefit of your datum
sort patch), without considering that it could simply be skipped by
only considering state->datumTypeByVal (which is what you've proposed
here).
This requirement is much less likely than wanting to create
pass-by-value abbreviated keys for a pass-by-value datatype (which, as
I go into above, seems at least possible). This seems like a very
insignificant restriction, not worth formalizing or even mentioning in
code comments.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2015-01-21 22:50:24 | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-01-21 22:28:35 | Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement |