From: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types |
Date: | 2017-11-09 19:55:33 |
Message-ID: | CAE2gYzxX3HDzg2SSMUOU=uRtyWpwXe3so1xaY=tq_d-NNVe5Zw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> This is also effecting lseg ## box operator.
>
> Mmm.. It returns (1.5, 1.5) with the 0004 patch. It is surely a
> point on the second operand but I'm not sure it's right that the
> operator returns a specific point for two parallel segments.
I am changing it to return NULL, when they are parallel.
> I'd like to put comments on 0001 and 0004 only now:
>
> - Adding [LR]DELIM_L looks good but they should be described in
> the comment just above.
I will mention it on the new version.
> - I'm not sure the change of box_construct is good but currently
> all callers fits the new interface (giving two points, not
> four coordinates).
I tried to make things more consistent. The other constructors takes points.
> - close_lseg seems forgetting the case where the two given
> segments are crossing (and parallel).
I am re-implementing it covering those cases.
> - make_bound_box operates directly on the poly->boundbox. I'm
> afraid that such coding hinders compiers from using registers.
I am changing it back.
> This is a bit apart from this patch, it would be better if we
> could eliminate internal calls using DirectFunctionCall.
We don't seem to be able to fix all issues without doing that. I will
incorporate the change.
Thank you for your review. I will address your other email before
posting new versions.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-11-09 19:56:23 | Re: Simplify ACL handling for large objects and removal of superuser() checks |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-11-09 19:42:17 | Re: why not parallel seq scan for slow functions |