Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch

>
> It is my assumption this has been applied to 6.5 beta, right?

    Don't know. Hiroshi - do you see your code anywhere?


Jan

>
> [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > Hello all,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
> > > [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of Hannu Krosing
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 3:43 AM
> > > To: Jan Wieck
> > > Cc: hackers@postgreSQL.org
> > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 beta and ORDER BY patch
> > >
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >
> > > After that the reverse index scans, so that the index that are
> > > backwards can also be used for sorting.
> > > BTW, can this be easily implemented/effective in PostgreSQL or are
> > > our btree indexes optimised for forward scans ?
> > >
> >
> > PostgreSQL seems to have the ability to scan Index backward
> > because we can execute "fetch backward" command.
> > IMHO _bt_first() fucntion used to find first item in a scan should
> > be changed to work well in case of backward positioning.
> >
> > I think this change also gives the partial solution for the problem
> > [ [HACKERS] Cursor Movement - Past the End ] reported by
> > David Hartwig.
> >
> > I have a sample code for this change.
> > I can send it if someone want to check or test it.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Hiroshi Inoue
> > Inoue@tpf.co.jp
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>   Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
>   maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
>


--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#======================================== jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #