Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYn9L+GsR4kqDNsCeoo76W8BDJqH9nVez0ktCsx5jGfOA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions  (amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Hash Functions  (amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:12 PM, amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a small query,  what if I want a cache entry with extended hash
> function instead standard one, I might require that while adding
> hash_array_extended function? Do you think we need to extend
> lookup_type_cache() as well?

Hmm, I thought you had changed the hash partitioning stuff so that it
didn't rely on lookup_type_cache().  You have to look up the function
using the opclass provided in the partition key definition;
lookup_type_cache() will give you the default one for the datatype.
Maybe just use get_opfamily_proc?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Add support for tuple routing to foreign partitions
Next
From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Segmentation Fault during pg_restore using '--use-list' and '--jobs'