On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > Sort support for text with strxfrm() poor man's keys > --- > > Peter: Are you waiting for Robert to review this? Robert, could you review > the latest patch, please? Peter: Could you try to get rid of the extra > SortSupport object that Robert didn't like? > (http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ca+tgmobde+ydfnhts0gwpt54-er8bpt3vx8rpshd+98ctdo...@mail.gmail.com). > I think it would speed up the process if you did that, instead of waiting > for Robert to find the time.
I am not waiting on Robert to spend the time, FWIW. The question that resolving if we should not have an extra sortsupport object is blocking on is the need to have a consistent sorttuple.datum1 representation for the benefit of having comparetup_heap() know that it's either always abbreviated keys or always pointers to text. My view is that it's not worth going back to fix up datum1 to always be a pointer to text when we abort abbreviation - I think we should just forget about datum1 on the rare occasion that happens (due to the costs involved, as well as the complexity implied). I think that it will be necessary for me to rigorously prove that view, as with the "memcmp() == 0" thing. So I'm looking at that. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
