From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
Cc: | Xiao Meng <mx(dot)cogito(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Date: | 2008-09-04 20:06:23 |
Message-ID: | 29386.1220558783@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
> I performed code review and see my comments.
Thanks for the comments. I've incorporated all of these into an updated
patch that I'm preparing, except for
> Why not define new datatype for example HashKey instead of uint32?
This seems like a good idea, but I think we should do it as a separate,
cosmetic-cleanup patch. It'll touch a lot of parts of access/hash/ that
the current patch doesn't need to change, and thus complicate reviewing.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-04 20:28:34 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-04 20:06:18 | Re: Need more reviewers! |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-04 20:28:34 | Re: hash index improving v3 |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-04 16:57:04 | Re: [PATCHES] hash index improving v3 |