Re: [HACKERS] discussion on proposed int8_ops patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] discussion on proposed int8_ops patch
Date
Msg-id 36F5098C.3573A72A@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] discussion on proposed int8_ops patch  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] discussion on proposed int8_ops patch
List pgsql-hackers
> Applied, though there was some wrapping of the e-mail I had to clean 
> up.
> Your hash code looks fine, so I enabled it by removing the ifdef's.  
> > Enclosed below I have a patch to allow a btree index on the int8 
> > type.
> > I would like some feedback on what the hash function for the int8 
> > hash function in the ./backend/access/hash/hashfunc.c should return.
> > Also, could someone (maybe Tomas Lockhart?) look-over the patch and 
> > make sure the system table entries are correct?  I've tried to 
> > research them as much as I could, but some of them are still not 
> > clear to me.

*argh* I had responded to Ryan and the list that there were problems
with the patch and that I would fix it up and then apply to the tree.
So don't expect this stuff to work as-is, and now I'll have to figure
out what else has changed :(

Man, I go away for two weeks and look at what happens ;)
                           - Tom


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Blazso
Date:
Subject: problems are now solved with the view
Next
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] parser enhancement request for 6.5