From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>
Cc: Xiao Meng <mx.cogito@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org, "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: hash index improving v3
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:06:23 -0400
Message-ID: <29386.1220558783@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48BFDA8D.3080506@sun.com>
References: <ded849dd0808171846g2c6c65adub942bd2510a6c94f@mail.gmail.com>
<48BFDA8D.3080506@sun.com>
Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> I performed code review and see my comments.
Thanks for the comments. I've incorporated all of these into an updated
patch that I'm preparing, except for
> Why not define new datatype for example HashKey instead of uint32?
This seems like a good idea, but I think we should do it as a separate,
cosmetic-cleanup patch. It'll touch a lot of parts of access/hash/ that
the current patch doesn't need to change, and thus complicate reviewing.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM, mx.cogito@gmail.com, jonah.harris@gmail.com
Subject: Re: hash index improving v3
In-Reply-To: <29386.1220558783@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox