Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomas Vondra
Subject Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)
Date
Msg-id 20200512181807.obxxdbrbalrdadht@development
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 02:25:23PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 06:48:02PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 3:19 PM Tomas Vondra
>><tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>I'm generally OK with most of this - I'd probably keep the single-line
>>>format, but I don't feel very strongly about that and if others think
>>>using two lines is better ...
>>>
>>>Barring objections I'll get this polished and pushed soon-ish (say,
>>>early next week).
>>
>>I see something about starting a new thread on the Open Items page.
>>Please CC me on this.
>>
>>Speaking in my capacity as an RMT member: Glad to see that you plan to
>>close this item out next week. (I had planned on giving you a nudge
>>about this, but it looks like I don't really have to now.)
>>
>
>Not sure about about the new thread - the discussion continues on the
>main incremental sort thread, I don't see any proposal to start a new
>thread there. IMO it'd be pointless at this point.
>

I've pushed both patches, fixing typos and explain format.


regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort)