Re: point_ops for GiST

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: point_ops for GiST
Date: 2010-01-11 18:17:25
Message-ID: 603c8f071001111017p56f9b5bau9e3a912f669501c0@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2010/1/11 Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>:
>> I have reviewed this patch and it looks good to me.  The only
>> substantive question I have is why gist_point_consistent() uses a
>> different coding pattern for the box case than it does for the polygon
>> and circle cases?  It's not obvious to me on the face of it why these
>> aren't consistent.
>
> gist_circle_consistent/gist_poly_consistent set recheck flag to true because
> corresponding index contains only bounding box of indexed values
> (circle/polygon). gist_point_consistent could do an exact check. Will add a
> coments.

Make sense. A comment sounds good.

>> Beyond that, I have a variety of minor whitespace and commenting
>> suggestions, so I am attaching an updated version of the patch as well
>
> Agree with your changes. Suppose, there is no objection to commit it?

No, I think it looks good... if no one else chimes in with objections
in the next day or two I would go ahead.

...Robert

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-01-11 18:18:09 Re: Red-black tree for GIN
Previous Message Teodor Sigaev 2010-01-11 18:08:43 Re: Red-black tree for GIN