RE: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch
| От | Hiroshi Inoue |
|---|---|
| Тема | RE: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 000d01be4ff1$36f08e80$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch (Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello all, > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org > [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of Hannu Krosing > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 3:43 AM > To: Jan Wieck > Cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch > [snip] > > After that the reverse index scans, so that the index that are > backwards can also be used for sorting. > BTW, can this be easily implemented/effective in PostgreSQL or are > our btree indexes optimised for forward scans ? > PostgreSQL seems to have the ability to scan Index backward because we can execute "fetch backward" command. IMHO _bt_first() fucntion used to find first item in a scan should be changed to work well in case of backward positioning. I think this change also gives the partial solution for the problem [ [HACKERS] Cursor Movement - Past the End ] reported by David Hartwig. I have a sample code for this change. I can send it if someone want to check or test it. Thanks. Hiroshi Inoue Inoue@tpf.co.jp
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: