Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families
Date
Msg-id 1327524700-sup-5905@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: Second thoughts on CheckIndexCompatible() vs. operator families  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié ene 25 17:32:49 -0300 2012:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > New version that repairs a defective test case.
>
> Committed.  I don't find this to be particularly good style:
>
> +       for (i = 0; i < old_natts && ret; i++)
> +               ret = (!IsPolymorphicType(get_opclass_input_type(classObjectId[i
> +                          irel->rd_att->attrs[i]->atttypid == typeObjectId[i]);
>
> ...but I am not sure whether we have any formal policy against it, so
> I just committed it as-is for now.  I would have surrounded the loop
> with an if (ret) block and written the body of the loop as if
> (condition) { ret = false; break; }.

I find that code way too clever.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: GUC_REPORT for protocol tunables was: Re: Optimize binary serialization format of arrays with fixed size elements
Next
From: Nathan Boley
Date:
Subject: Re: some longer, larger pgbench tests with various performance-related patches