| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: updated SORT/LIMIT patch |
| Date: | 2007-05-16 13:18:56 |
| Message-ID: | 20070516131856.GD4582@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Gregory Stark wrote:
> Attached is a small patch which fixes this case. It also makes the check
> slightly more liberal -- we don't need to resort if the previous sort was
> unbounded or the bound was greater than or equal to the new bound.
Huh, can you clarify this comment:
+ * XXX It would be nice to check tuplesortstate->boundUsed too but that
+ * seems like an abstraction violation. And for that matter to check
+ * the tuplesort to see if randomaccess is possible even if it wasn't
+ * requested so we don't resort input when the parameters haven't
+ * changed if it was sorted in memory.
I'm having serious trouble parsing it.
Thanks.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-05-16 13:39:24 | Re: updated SORT/LIMIT patch |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-05-16 12:44:20 | Re: [DOCS] Autovacuum and XID wraparound |