| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |
| Date: | 2014-12-02 22:36:44 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZS38WBdPb9uS2Qx20RAVW15j_q6fOSY7DoM0vT3J_cfCQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Right, and what I'm saying is that maybe the "applicability" flag
> shouldn't be stored in the SortSupport object, but passed down as an
> argument.
But then how does that information get to any given sortsupport
routine? That's the place that really needs to know if abbreviation is
useful. In general, they're only passed a SortSupport object. Are you
suggesting revising the signature required of SortSupport routines to
add that extra flag as an additional argument?
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-12-02 22:44:55 | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-12-02 22:21:57 | Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) |