On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> (concerns about a second sortsupport state)
I think I may have underestimated the cost of not have
sorttuple.datum1 with a pointer-to-text representation available in
cases such as the one you describe.
Attached revision introduces an alternative approach, which does not
have a separate sortsupport state struct. In the event of aborting
abbreviation, we go back and fix-up datum1 to have a consistently have
a pointer to text representation, making a comparator swap safe - at
that point, it's as if abbreviation was never even considered (apart
from the cost, of course). We still need a special tie-breaker
comparator, though.
I hope this addresses your concern.
--
Peter Geoghegan
