On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > Attached is a quick sketch of how this could perhaps be done (ignoring > for the moment the relatively-boring opclass pushups).
Here it is with some relatively-boring opclass pushups added. I just did the int4 bit; the same thing will need to be done, uh, 35 more times. But you get the gist. No, not that kind of gist.
I will work on this.
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?
