Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>
Subject: Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
Date: 2015-03-23 19:07:21
Message-ID: CAM3SWZRBteSE39U08_v60_H=RJbqUdaOA-sf=46cq9J+TSL_dw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> In my opinion, Andrew's version is far clearer. Peter's version is
> full of jargon that I can't understand. I could probably figure it
> out with a few hours and a search engine, but that really shouldn't be
> necessary.

Really? Andrew's version doesn't even explain what excess-K is. Surely
that's obscure jargon that requires an explanation.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-03-23 19:11:10 Re: PATCH: pgbench - merging transaction logs
Previous Message Andrew Gierth 2015-03-23 19:06:51 Re: Exposing PG_VERSION_NUM in pg_config