Re: Why we have tuplestore and tuplesort?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why we have tuplestore and tuplesort?
Date: 2009-08-15 19:19:32
Message-ID: 17605.1250363972@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Looking for git/cvs log a bit, tuplesort was already there since 1999
> while tuplestore was introduced around 2000 for materialized node. Why
> then was tuplestore invented as a new feature instead of extending
> tuplesort? Can't we unit them now?

I think they'd be unmaintainable if merged. Each one is complicated
enough as-is, and they have different concerns and different use-cases
to optimize for. Moreover it's not clear that merging them would buy us
much --- saving one copy step doesn't excite me, even if it actually
came out to be true which I'm unconvinced about.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-08-15 20:23:20 pgsql: Remove tabs from SGML.
Previous Message Hitoshi Harada 2009-08-15 18:51:10 Why we have tuplestore and tuplesort?