On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Uh, why? It's not a large amount of code and it seems like removing > it puts a fair-size hole in the symmetry of tuplesort's capabilities.
It's not a small amount of code either. Removing the code clarifies the division of labor between COPYTUP() routines in general, their callers (tuplesort_putheaptuple() and tuplesort_puttupleslot() -- which are also puttuple_common() callers), and routines that are similar to those caller routines (in that they at least call puttuple_common()) that do not call COPYTUP() (tuplesort_putdatum(), and now tuplesort_putindextuplevalues()). I believe that this has value. All the extra boilerplate code misleads. -- 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
