Re: dropping datumSort field - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zhihong Yu
Subject Re: dropping datumSort field
Date
Msg-id CALNJ-vT0mL912vEWm5G_n_UdnZgEOCQVSHfASSoFky7xegEc+g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: dropping datumSort field  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: dropping datumSort field  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: dropping datumSort field  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 8:01 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 5:51 PM Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I was looking at ExecSort() w.r.t. datum sort.
>
> I wonder if the datumSort field can be dropped.
> Here is a patch illustrating the potential simplification.
>
> Please take a look.

One problem with this patch is that, if I apply it, PostgreSQL does not compile:

nodeSort.c:197:6: error: use of undeclared identifier 'tupDesc'
        if (tupDesc->natts == 1)
            ^
1 error generated.

Leaving that aside, I don't really see any advantage in this sort of change.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Thanks for trying out the patch.

        TupleDesc   tupDesc;

tupDesc is declared inside `if (!node->sort_Done)` block whereas the last reference to tupDesc is outside the if block.

I take your review comment and will go back to do more homework.

Cheers

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: making relfilenodes 56 bits
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: dropping datumSort field