Re: SQL:2011 application time
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL:2011 application time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7be8724a-5c25-46d7-8325-1bd8be6fa523@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL:2011 application time (Paul Jungwirth <pj@illuminatedcomputing.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: SQL:2011 application time
(jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 31.12.23 09:51, Paul Jungwirth wrote: > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 12:59 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> > wrote: > > > > On 02.12.23 19:41, Paul Jungwirth wrote: > > > So what do you think of this idea instead?: > > > > > > We could add a new (optional) support function to GiST that translates > > > "well-known" strategy numbers into the opclass's own strategy numbers. > > > > I had some conversations about this behind the scenes. I think this > > idea makes sense. > > Here is a patch series with the GiST stratnum support function added. I > put this into a separate patch (before all the temporal ones), so it's > easier to review. Then in the PK patch (now #2) we call that function to > figure out the = and && operators. I think this is a big improvement. I like this solution. Here is some more detailed review of the first two patches. (I reviewed v20; I see you have also posted v21, but they don't appear very different for this purpose.) v20-0001-Add-stratnum-GiST-support-function.patch * contrib/btree_gist/Makefile Needs corresponding meson.build updates. * contrib/btree_gist/btree_gist--1.7--1.8.sql Should gist_stratnum_btree() live in contrib/btree_gist/ or in core? Are there other extensions that use the btree strategy numbers for gist? +ALTER OPERATOR FAMILY gist_vbit_ops USING gist ADD + FUNCTION 12 (varbit, varbit) gist_stratnum_btree (int2) ; Is there a reason for the extra space after FUNCTION here (repeated throughout the file)? +-- added in 1.4: What is the purpose of these "added in" comments? v20-0002-Add-temporal-PRIMARY-KEY-and-UNIQUE-constraints.patch * contrib/btree_gist/Makefile Also update meson.build. * contrib/btree_gist/sql/without_overlaps.sql Maybe also insert a few values, to verify that the constraint actually does something? * doc/src/sgml/ref/create_table.sgml Is "must have a range type" still true? With the changes to the strategy number mapping, any type with a supported operator class should work? * src/backend/utils/adt/ruleutils.c Is it actually useful to add an argument to decompile_column_index_array()? Wouldn't it be easier to just print the " WITHOUT OVERLAPS" in the caller after returning from it? * src/include/access/gist_private.h The added function gistTranslateStratnum() isn't really "private" to gist. So access/gist.h would be a better place for it. Also, most other functions there appear to be named "GistSomething", so a more consistent name might be GistTranslateStratnum. * src/include/access/stratnum.h The added StrategyIsValid() doesn't seem that useful? Plenty of existing code just compares against InvalidStrategy, and there is only one caller for the new function. I suggest to do without it. * src/include/commands/defrem.h We are using two terms here, well-known strategy number and canonical strategy number, to mean the same thing (I think?). Let's try to stick with one. Or explain the relationship? If these points are addressed, and maybe with another round of checking that all corner cases are covered, I think these patches (0001 and 0002) are close to ready.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:
Следующее
От: "Jonathan S. Katz"Дата:
Сообщение: Re: heavily contended lwlocks with long wait queues scale badly