Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)
Date
Msg-id 20140407192019.GC4582@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Peter Geoghegan (pg@heroku.com) wrote:
> 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.

Well, as apparently no one is objecting to Greg reviewing it, I'd
suggest he do that and actually articulate his feelings on the patch
post-review and exactly what it is changing and if he feels it needs
public comment, rather than all this speculation by folks who aren't
looking at the patch.

In other words, in hindsight, Greg was rather premature with his
suggestion that he might commit it and rather than suggesting such, he
should have just said he was going to review it and then come back with
a detailed email argueing the case for it to go in.

I don't particularly fault Greg for that, but perhaps some of this could
be avoided in the future.
Thanks,
    Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: "Transaction local" statistics are incorrect at speed