| From: | Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Small fix for inv_getsize |
| Date: | 2000-11-02 17:59:04 |
| Message-ID: | 00110223590400.00541@dyp.perchine.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
> > OK. I see... I just wondering whether it is possible to use index to get
> > the maximum...
>
> I think you are right, it's possible to do it that way. The original
> code was broken because it didn't check tuple visibility, so I just
> copied-and-pasted some other code without thinking very hard. Feel
> free to improve it.
Sorry, but I did not find any significant difference between my code and code
you wrote. Except VARATT_IS_EXTENDED check (is it neccessary, can I store
data and be sure that it is not toasted? I do not like this for BLOBs).
All other seems the same... Please give me an example of this check...
--
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine
----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp(at)perchine(dot)com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-02 18:24:41 | Re: Small fix for inv_getsize |
| Previous Message | Denis Perchine | 2000-11-02 17:57:10 | Re: Small fix for inv_getsize |