Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch
От | Leonardo F |
---|---|
Тема | Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 823922.75611.qm@web29014.mail.ird.yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> If we ever get another index type that supports ordered > scans, it'll be time enough to worry about cases like this. Ok > BTW, I think you could use tuplesort_begin_index_btree() rather than > touching _bt_mkscankey_nodata directly. well I created my own tuplesort_begin_rawheap method (copied from: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-08/msg01371.php ). From there I call _bt_mkscankey_nodata (as tuplesort_begin_index_btree() does), plus I set up everything else I'm going to need in tuplesort. Another question: why is IndexInfo.ii_Expressions a list? How can an index have more than one expression? Sorry if it's a stupid question, but I'm not familiar with index expressions. I think I'm almost there (some very stupid tests pass). I'll try to submit a patch soon to understand if I'm going in the right direction. Leonardo
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: