On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote: > Really? The pre-check thing wasn't too complex for Magnus to have a > couple of bullet points on it *specifically* in his high level NYC > talk on Postgres 9.5 features [1]. I don't think it's hard to > understand at all. > > Also, it's simply incorrect to describe abbreviation as: "Improve the > speed of sorting character and numeric fields". Character fields > presumably include character(n), and as I pointed out character(n) > lacks abbreviation support.
Where are we on this? Bruce mentioned that he'd revisit this during pgCon. Aside from the issue of whether or not the pre-check thing is mentioned, and aside from the issue of correctly identifying which types the abbreviation optimization applies to, I have another concern: I cannot imagine why we'd fail to mention a totally independent speed up of about 10% [1] for CREATE INDEX on integer columns. This speed-up has nothing to do with abbreviation or anything else mentioned in the 9.5 release notes currently; it's down to commit 5ea86e6e, which extended sortsupport to work with cases like CREATE INDEX and CLUSTER. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/545ac1d9.1040...@proxel.se -- 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