Re: FTI contrib
От | Christopher Kings-Lynne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: FTI contrib |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ECEHIKNFIMMECLEBJFIGCENDCBAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: FTI contrib (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: FTI contrib
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Well, the FTI code that was committed works perfectly - it compiles fine against 7.0.3 and 7.1.2 and is in use indexing 2 columns in 20000 row tables in two production and one test servers. The updated fti.pl we submitted still uses the PGConnect style functions, rather than the PG::Connect style functions. However, I don't know why there is this different in Pg.pm??? My issue with accessing args was that the docs on writing functions and triggers were a bit confusing. I got the impression that one had to access the trigger args via GETARG macros - but it turns out that is not the case. Still, someone may wish to review the fti code, and check our optimizations. Plus, since it's is 100% backwards compatible with the version in 7.1.2, you might want to back port it to the 7.1.* branch? Cheers, Chris > Has this been addressed? > > > > "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes: > > > The latest patch we submitted to the fulltextindex module > improved lots of > > > things but something we could not get to work was the > apparently correct use > > > of the PG_GETARG* macros, etc. > > > > > Whenever we used these macros, we always got 0 or NULL as our > values. So, > > > we reverted to the trigger->tgargs array. > > > > Trigger functions don't get their arguments the normal way. The GETARG > > macros don't know anything about trigger arguments... so the original > > code was correct as it was. I haven't had time to look at your patch, > > but maybe I should go do that. > > > > regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: