From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Anton" <anton200(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: partitioned table and ORDER BY indexed_field DESC LIMIT 1 |
Date: | 2007-10-30 05:54:02 |
Message-ID: | 16595.1193723642@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
> Sure - it's here:
> http://momjian.us/mhonarc/patches_hold/msg00381.html
Luke, this is not a patch, and I'm getting pretty dang tired of seeing
you refer to it as one. What this is is a very-selective extract from
Greenplum proprietary code. If you'd like us to think it is a patch,
you need to offer the source code to all the GP-specific functions that
are called in the quoted additions.
Hell, the diff is *against* GP-specific code --- it removes calls
to functions that we've never seen, eg here:
- /* Use constant expr if available. Will be at head of list. */
- if (CdbPathkeyEqualsConstant(pathkey))
This is not a patch, and your statements that it's only a minor porting
matter to turn it into one are lie^H^H^Hnonsense. Please lift the
skirts higher than the ankle region if you want us to get excited.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | ruben | 2007-10-30 08:20:24 | High Availability and Load Balancing |
Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2007-10-30 05:46:22 | Re: partitioned table and ORDER BY indexed_field DESC LIMIT 1 |