On 02/17/2015 02:56 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com
>> wrote:
>
>> Ok, thanks for the review! I have committed this, with some cleanup and
>> more comments added.
>
> ISTM that checks in pairingheap_GISTSearchItem_cmp is incorrect. This
> function should perform inverse comparison. Thus, if item a should be
> checked first function should return 1. Current behavior doesn't lead to
> incorrect query answers, but it could be slower than correct version.
Good catch. Fixed, thanks.
While testing this, I also noticed a bug in the pairing heap code
itself. Fixed that too.
- Heikki
