Re: dropping datumSort field
| От | Zhihong Yu |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: dropping datumSort field |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CALNJ-vT0mL912vEWm5G_n_UdnZgEOCQVSHfASSoFky7xegEc+g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: dropping datumSort field (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: dropping datumSort field
Re: dropping datumSort field |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 8:01 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 5:51 PM Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I was looking at ExecSort() w.r.t. datum sort.
>
> I wonder if the datumSort field can be dropped.
> Here is a patch illustrating the potential simplification.
>
> Please take a look.
One problem with this patch is that, if I apply it, PostgreSQL does not compile:
nodeSort.c:197:6: error: use of undeclared identifier 'tupDesc'
if (tupDesc->natts == 1)
^
1 error generated.
Leaving that aside, I don't really see any advantage in this sort of change.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Thanks for trying out the patch.
TupleDesc tupDesc;
tupDesc is declared inside `if (!node->sort_Done)` block whereas the last reference to tupDesc is outside the if block.
I take your review comment and will go back to do more homework.
Cheers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: