From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dmitry Koterov <dmitry(at)koterov(dot)ru>, Postgres <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Patch: propose to include 3 new functions into intarray and intagg |
Date: | 2008-09-05 12:35:24 |
Message-ID: | 48C1278C.2020504@bluegap.ch |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Gregory Stark wrote:
>> The naming 'bidx' seems a bit weired to me, but otherwise I'm also optimistic
>> about it.
>
> If we wanted to put that in core
Uh.. ATM it's just a patch against contrib. I don't think 'bidx' needs
to go into core. Otherwise we'd have to move the whole intarr contrib
module as well, no?
> it would make more sense to have a flag on
> the array indicating whether it's sorted or not which is maintained whenever
> we construct or alter an array. Then just have the regular _int_contains()
> (which is an operator @>) take advantage of it if it's set and the data type
> is fixed-size.
Yeah, that sounds like a good thing. Currently, the intarr module
doesn't provide the optimized functions for the outside world
(_int_inter_inner() and such.. the _inner appendix really means "inside
intarr module only). I've ended up copy'n'pasting that code into my own
module, where I take care about ordering myself. But still want to
maintain the optimization.
However, that's probably not within the scope of this patch.
Regards
Markus Wanner
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marko Kreen | 2008-09-05 12:39:52 | Withdraw PL/Proxy from commitfest |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-09-05 12:17:54 | Re: Patch: propose to include 3 new functions into intarray and intagg |