Re: Double sorting split patch
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-10-05T07:37:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix contrib/seg's GiST picksplit method.
- 2a6ebe70fb2f 9.1.0 cited
-
Some copy editing of pg_read_binary_file() patch.
- 290f1603b420 9.1.0 cited
Attachments
- double-sorting-split-0.6-heikki.patch (text/x-diff) patch
On 04.10.2011 15:10, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Heikki Linnakangas< > heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> Ok. Could you phrase that as a code comment? >> >> Here's a version of the patch I've been working on. There's no functional >> changes, just a lot of moving things around, comment changes, etc. to >> hopefully make it more readable. > > Thanks for your work on this patch. Patch with comment is attached. Thanks, I incorporated that, and did a lot of other comment changes. I included the example you gave earlier on how the first phase of the algorithm works, in a comment. Please review, and if you have some test cases at hand, run them. I think this is ready for commit now. One more thing: > /* Allocate vectors for results */ > nbytes = (maxoff + 2) * sizeof(OffsetNumber); > v->spl_left = (OffsetNumber *) palloc(nbytes); > v->spl_right = (OffsetNumber *) palloc(nbytes); Why "maxoff + 2" ? Allocating a few extra bytes is obviously harmless, but I wonder if it was just a leftover from something. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com