Re: [HACKERS] Issue is changing _bt_compare function and

2005-10-09 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Well, _bt_compare is used for every btree index in the system, including all the system indexes. A fresh initdb already has several dozen indexes already so your code has to deal with that. Remember, _bt_compare compares strings, integers, floats, dates, etc and your code needs to work for all

Re: [HACKERS] Issue is changing _bt_compare function and

2005-10-08 Thread sandeep satpal
Hello, Sorry for last mail. I hope this time I will explain my doubt more clearly. The _bt_compare function in nbtree.c file calls FunctionCall2 and it passes two arguments , one is the scankey which we want to search on and other key is on current b-tree node. My problem is I want to pass

Re: [HACKERS] Issue is changing _bt_compare function and

2005-10-08 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 12:48:50PM +0530, sandeep satpal wrote: The _bt_compare function in nbtree.c file calls FunctionCall2 and it passes two arguments , one is the scankey which we want to search on and other key is on current b-tree node. My problem is I want to pass three parameter

Re: [HACKERS] Issue is changing _bt_compare function and

2005-10-08 Thread Alvaro Herrera
sandeep satpal wrote: The _bt_compare function in nbtree.c file calls FunctionCall2 and it passes two arguments , one is the scankey which we want to search on and other key is on current b-tree node. My problem is I want to pass three parameter and the third argument will be used for

[HACKERS] Issue is changing _bt_compare function and btcompare.c file

2005-10-07 Thread sandeep satpal
Hello all, In _bt_compare function , instead of calling FunctionCall2 , I want to call FunctionCall3 with three parameter and in btcompare.c btname_pattern_cmp function will take three parameter and i want to change this function according to third parameter. But the biggest issue is

Re: [HACKERS] Issue is changing _bt_compare function and

2005-10-07 Thread Neil Conway
On Sat, 2005-08-10 at 00:42 +0530, sandeep satpal wrote: ... please guide me Two suggestions: (1) Don't start new threads by replying to an existing thread of no relevance to the new subject (2) Spend some time phrasing your question in a coherent manner -- you're more likely to get a useful