From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | "alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com" <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp" <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BRIN INDEX value |
Date: | 2015-09-05 00:52:09 |
Message-ID: | CA+HiwqHYfEPQ1C_wMh8K_YYOOGRTtqSnhuAZ50zFGUEb4XsU_w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday, September 5, 2015, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> > Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> > On 9/4/2015 2:04 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> >>> One thing I imagine we could do is to change the signature of
> >> >>> summrize_range() to also include heapNumBlks which its (only) caller
> >> >>> brinsummarize() already computes. It will look like:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> static void summarize_range(IndexInfo *indexInfo, BrinBuildState
> *state,
> >> >>> Relation heapRel,
> >> >>> BlockNumber heapBlk,
> >> >>> BlockNumber heapNumBlks);
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'd think changing summarize_range()'s signature would be relatively
> >> >>> easier/safer.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah, sounds good.
> >> >
> >> > Here's a patch to do that.
> >>
> >> Thanks. It looks good to me (and passed all the regression tests in
> >> master branch). I will commit your patch if there's no objection.
> >
> > Yeah, thanks, please go ahead.
>
> Thanks. Fix committed.
>
Thank you Ishii-san!
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2015-09-05 01:07:34 | Re: pg_ctl/pg_rewind tests vs. slow AIX buildfarm members |
Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2015-09-05 00:46:04 | Re: BRIN INDEX value |