Re: Ordered Append Node

Hi,

Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> I think you need it because there are potentially many input types.
> 
> Eh, "tapes".

Aha..

>> Given the partitioning case, I'd expect all rows to have an equal
>> tuple descriptor. Maybe this is a matter of what to optimize, then?
>>
>> Could you elaborate on what use case you have in mind?
> 
> You need a priority queue to figure out from which tape (partition)
> you need to remove the next tuple.

And why do you need lots of heap memory to do that? Anything wrong with 
the zipper approach I've outlined upthread?

Am I missing something?

Regards

Markus