On 10/28/2010 12:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> BTW, maybe we could have the best of both worlds? Dunno about Perl,
> but in some languages it would be possible to instantiate the hash
> only if it's actually touched. Passing the data as a hash definitely
> seems to fit with the spirit of things otherwise, so as long as it
> didn't cost cycles when not needed, I'd be in favor of that API.
Maybe, but I think that's getting rather beyond my perlguts-fu. I think
we'd need to do that via PERL_MAGIC_tied, but it's new territory for me.
Anyone else want to chime in?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Boszormenyi Zoltan||Date: 2010-10-28 17:11:13|
|Subject: Re: plan time of MASSIVE partitioning ...|
|Previous:||From: Ben||Date: 2010-10-28 16:57:49|
|Subject: contsel and gist|