Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Юрий Соколов
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples
Date
Msg-id CAL-rCA2n7UfVu1Ui0f+7cVN4vAKVM0+-cZKb_ka6-mGQBAF92w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Small improvement to compactify_tuples  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
hi,

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> Maybe it's a stupid question. But would we still want to have this after
>> the change? These should be just specializations of the template version
>> imo.

"generic" version operates on bytes, and it will be a bit hard to combine it with
templated version. Not impossible, but it will look ugly.

> I also wonder why regression test output has changed. Wasn't this
> supposed to be a mechanical change in how the templating is
> implemented? Why would the behavior of the algorithm change, even if
> the change is only a change in the output order among equal elements?

I did some change to algorithm then. But I reverted changes, and now no need
in test fixes.

> Also, is that one last raw CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in the template
> definition supposed to be there?

There was error. Fixed.

In attach fixed qsort_template version.
And version for compactify_tuples with bucket_sort and templated qsort.

With regards,
Sokolov Yura.
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw super user checks