Re: Incremental sort for access method with ordered scan support (amcanorderbyop) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Richard Guo
Subject Re: Incremental sort for access method with ordered scan support (amcanorderbyop)
Date
Msg-id CAMbWs48RiJcmA7RhzdxyjEVYfCrf6Z3JLzQWfiGWAFVcnuph+Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Incremental sort for access method with ordered scan support (amcanorderbyop)  (Miroslav Bendik <miroslav.bendik@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Incremental sort for access method with ordered scan support (amcanorderbyop)
List pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Jul 2, 2023 at 12:02 PM Miroslav Bendik <miroslav.bendik@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, for suggestions.

On Sun 02. 07. 2023 at 10:18 Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. For comment "On success, the result list is ordered by pathkeys.", I
> think it'd be more accurate if we say something like "On success, the
> result list is ordered by pathkeys or a prefix list of pathkeys."
> considering the possibility of incremental sort.
>
> 2. The comment below is not true anymore.
>
>    /*
>     * Note: for any failure to match, we just return NIL immediately.
>     * There is no value in matching just some of the pathkeys.
>     */
> We should either remove it or change it to emphasize that we may return
> a prefix of the pathkeys for incremental sort.

Comments are updated now.

> BTW, would you please add the patch to the CF to not lose track of it?

Submitted <https://commitfest.postgresql.org/43/4433/>

The v4 patch looks good to me (maybe some cosmetic tweaks are still
needed for the comments).  I think it's now 'Ready for Committer'.

Thanks
Richard

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Will Mortensen
Date:
Subject: Re: Exposing the lock manager's WaitForLockers() to SQL
Next
From: Japin Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache