| From: | John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | cca5507 <cca5507(at)qq(dot)com> |
| Cc: | zengman <zengman(at)halodbtech(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: tuple radix sort |
| Date: | 2026-04-08 07:17:22 |
| Message-ID: | CANWCAZZzXHoDpCx394OAhu0ppW_OanbJzYifVwuALeNMhmF8TA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 1, 2026 at 4:27 PM cca5507 <cca5507(at)qq(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> How about adding an assertion here:
> + Assert(next_level > level);
> +
Good idea.
I also thought we should change this cast:
if (ssup->comparator == ssup_datum_signed_cmp)
{
- norm_datum1 = orig + ((uint64) PG_INT64_MAX) + 1;
+ norm_datum1 = orig + (Int64GetDatum(PG_INT64_MAX)) + 1;
}
Upthread you mention something else about treating Datum as an
integer, but I'm not sure if this is what you meant since you didn't
say. If you have concrete suggestions, feel free to share them.
--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Naylor | 2026-04-08 07:22:27 | Re: vectorized CRC on ARM64 |
| Previous Message | Lakshmi N | 2026-04-08 07:09:23 | DOCS: pg_plan_advice minor doc fixes |