Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses

<div dir="ltr"><br />On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Andres Freund <<a
href="mailto:andres@2ndquadrant.com">andres@2ndquadrant.com</a>>wrote:<br />><br />> On 2014-05-09 22:14:25
+0900,Michael Paquier wrote:<br />> > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Fujii Masao <<a
href="mailto:masao.fujii@gmail.com">masao.fujii@gmail.com</a>>wrote:<br /> > > > +DATA(insert OID = 3260 (
  403        pglsn_ops        PGNSP PGUID ));<br />> > > +DATA(insert OID = 3261 (    405        pglsn_ops    
  PGNSP PGUID ));<br />> > ><br />> > > The patch looks good to me except the name of index operator
class.<br/> > > > I think that "pg_lsn_ops" is better than "pglsn_ops" because it's for "pg_lsn"<br />>
>> data type.<br />> > Well, yes... Btw, before doing anything with this patch, I think that<br /> >
>the version of Fabrizio could be used as a base, but the regression<br />> > tests should be reshuffled a
bit...<br/>><br />> I honestly don't really see much point in the added tests. If at all I'd<br /> > rather
seemy tests from<br />> <a
href="http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20140506230722.GE24808%40awork2.anarazel.de">http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20140506230722.GE24808%40awork2.anarazel.de</a><br
/>> addded. With some EXPLAIN (COSTS OFF) they'd test more.<br />><br /><br />Ok. In a few hours I'll add your
suggestionand send it again.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />--<br />Fabrízio de Royes Mello<br />Consultoria/Coaching
PostgreSQL<br/> >> Timbira: <a href="http://www.timbira.com.br">http://www.timbira.com.br</a><br />>> Blog
sobreTI: <a href="http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com">http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com</a><br />>> Perfil
Linkedin:<a href="http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello">http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello</a><br /> >>
Twitter:<a href="http://twitter.com/fabriziomello">http://twitter.com/fabriziomello</a></div>