Re: GiST header cleanup - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: GiST header cleanup
Date
Msg-id 428966F3.2000208@samurai.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GiST header cleanup  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Patch applied.

Tom Lane wrote:
> One objection: I think the GiST amproc numbers (GIST_CONSISTENT_PROC
> and friends) *are* part of the API and should be in the public header,
> even if they happen not to be used by any C code at the moment.

Ok, I've moved these back to gist.h

> GISTNStrategies seems inherently bogus, since there's no essential limit
> on the number of strategies in a gist index.  I'd get rid of it.

Done.

> The "100" in pg_am.h is pretty nasty too, because it is on the one hand
> theoretically insufficient and on the other hand in practice way too
> much.

Yeah, I agree this is pretty ugly, but I'm not planning to fix it any
time soon, either...

-Neil

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST header cleanup
Next
From: Mahmoud Taghizadeh
Date:
Subject: Faarsi FAQ?