Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Leonardo F
Subject Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch
Date
Msg-id 366059.67064.qm@web29018.mail.ird.yahoo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> By the time you make this actually work in all cases, it's probably
> going to be more of a mess than the other way;

I meant to add only ASC/DESC; I would leave all other cases
(non-btrees, custom expression btrees) to use the old index-scan method.

> not to mention that it
> doesn't work *at all* without violating SPI internals.


You lost me there...





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan
Date:
Subject: Re: lock_timeout GUC patch
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: lock_timeout GUC patch