Re: [HACKERS] Number of index fields configurable
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Number of index fields configurable |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200001100517.AAA20027@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: [HACKERS] Number of index fields configurable ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Number of index fields configurable
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
[Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org > > [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian > > > > I have moved INDEX_MAX_KEYS to postgres.h, and have removed the > > hard-coded limits that it is 8 fields. I hope I got all of them. The > > default is still 8. > > > > There were only a few places left that had the 8 hard-coded. > > > > I haven't tested non-8 values but they should work. > > > > Shouldn't the following catalog be changed ? > > CATALOG(pg_index) > { > .... > int28 indkey; > ^^^^^ > oid8 indclass; > ^^^^^ The underlying definitions of the types are now based in the #define parameter. Not sure if this is going to work so I have not change the actual type names yet. I have a few more changes to commit now. Also, what should the new names be? Can't call it int16. Does anyone outside the source tree rely on those type names? -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: