Re: Sort support for macaddr8

On 2019-Jun-03, Peter Geoghegan wrote:

> As you know, it's a bit weird that we're proposing adding sort support
> with abbreviated keys for a type that is 8 bytes, since you'd expect
> it to also be pass-by-value on most platforms, which largely defeats
> the purpose of having abbreviated keys (though sort support could
> still make sense, for the same reason it makes sense to have it for
> int8). However, macaddr8 isn't actually pass-by-value, and it seems
> too late to do anything about that now, so abbreviated keys actually
> make sense.

I'm not sure I understand why you say it's too late to change now.
Surely the on-disk representation doesn't actually change, so it is not
impossible to change?  And you make it sound like doing that change is
worthwhile, performance-wise.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services