Re: texteq/byteaeq: avoid detoast [REVIEW] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Itagaki Takahiro
Subject Re: texteq/byteaeq: avoid detoast [REVIEW]
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinURwPsfyaqJRY6P0=fp5ma-ai4NJ2kvF40f+8w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to texteq/byteaeq: avoid detoast [REVIEW]  (Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net>)
Responses Re: texteq/byteaeq: avoid detoast [REVIEW]  (KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>)
Re: texteq/byteaeq: avoid detoast [REVIEW]  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 04:05, Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net> wrote:
> This is a review of:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=468
>
> Purpose:
> ========
> Equal and not-equal _may_ be quickly determined if their lengths are
> different.   This _may_ be a huge speed up if we don't have to detoast.

We can skip detoast to compare lengths of two text/bytea values
with the patch, but we still need detoast to compare the contents
of the values.

If we always generate same toasted byte sequences from the same raw
values, we don't need to detoast at all to compare the contents.
Is it possible or not?

--
Itagaki Takahiro


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Oliver Jowett
Date:
Subject: Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Weird issues when reading UDT from stored function
Next
From: KaiGai Kohei
Date:
Subject: Re: texteq/byteaeq: avoid detoast [REVIEW]