Re: [PATCH] Refactor bytea_sortsupport(), take two

From: John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)tigerdata(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactor bytea_sortsupport(), take two
Date: 2025-12-16 08:28:18
Message-ID: CANWCAZYJ9y0x9v_P7V8HhTy88pXuO98G+zUUKhqMMhzVzj4Dog@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:45 PM Aleksander Alekseev
<aleksander(at)tigerdata(dot)com> wrote:
> > "Short byteas will have terminating NUL bytes in the abbreviated
> > datum. Abbreviated comparison need not make a distinction between
> > thse NUL bytes, and NUL bytes representing actual NULs in the
> > authoritative representation." [...]
> >
> > After that, the rest seems to flow better at a quick glance.
>
> Yes, it is much better now, thanks! Previously the comment was
> reasoning about NUL bytes as if normally bytea can't have them which
> IMO was confusing.

Pushed v7 with a few small adjustments, mostly for pgindent and the
new practice to prefer palloc_object().

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chao Li 2025-12-16 08:39:10 Re: DOCS - Clarify the publication 'publish_via_partition_root' default value.
Previous Message Chao Li 2025-12-16 08:05:56 Re: [BUG] [PATCH] pg_basebackup produces wrong incremental files after relation truncation in segmented tables