| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <pgsql(at)markdilger(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: text_position worst case runtime |
| Date: | 2006-05-19 16:54:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20060519165455.GH9919@surnet.cl |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> writes:
> > Perhaps it would be best to add a seperate set of functions that use
> > boyer-moore, and reference them in appropriate places in the
> > documentation. Unless someone has a better idea on how we can find out
> > what people are actually doing in the field...
>
> You've obviously missed the point of my concern, which is code bloat.
> A parallel set of functions incorporating B-M would make things worse
> not better from that standpoint. (Unless you are proposing that someone
> do it as a separate pgfoundry project; which'd be fine with me. I'm
> just concerned about how much we buy into as core features.)
So why not just replace our code with better algorithms? We could use
Shift-Or or Shift-And which AFAIK are even better than Boyer-Moore.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc Munro | 2006-05-19 16:56:08 | Re: New feature proposal |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-19 16:45:22 | Re: text_position worst case runtime |