| From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shaun Thomas <shaun(dot)thomas(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) |
| Date: | 2019-09-12 15:54:06 |
| Message-ID: | CAAaqYe_4160VMZBM4yF-02hm_xBK89HhdDSRJOuYDWbY9Xqyow@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> OK, so we have that now. I suppose this spreadsheet now tells us which
> places are useful and which aren't, at least for the queries that you've
> tested. Dowe that mean that we want to get the patch to consider adding
> paths only the places that your spreadsheet says are useful? I'm not
> sure what the next steps are for this patch.
I wanted to note here that I haven't abandoned this patch, but ended
up needing to use my extra time for working on a conference talk. That
talk is today, so I'm hoping to be able to catch up on this again
soon.
James Coleman
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-09-12 16:19:04 | Re: Leakproofness of texteq()/textne() |
| Previous Message | Antonin Houska | 2019-09-12 15:51:50 | JSON parser discards value of string token |