Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
>> There are patches that are trivial enough
>> that it's fine for someone to commit them without a public review
>> first, but this isn't remotely close to being in that category.  If
>> nothing else, the fact that it extends the definition of the btree
>> opclass is sufficient reason to merit a public review.
>
> hrmpf.  You have a good point about that- I admit that I didn't consider
> that as much as I should have.

Actually, contrary to the original subject of this thread, that isn't
the case. I have not added a support function 3, which I ultimately
concluded was a bad idea. This is all sort support.


-- 
Peter Geoghegan