| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Etsuro Fujita" <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | "'Kyotaro HORIGUCHI'" <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Get more from indices. |
| Date: | 2013-12-31 21:01:34 |
| Message-ID: | 32033.1388523694@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Etsuro Fujita" <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> [ pathkey_and_uniqueindx_v7_20131203.patch ]
I started to look at this patch. I don't understand the reason for the
foreach loop in index_pathkeys_are_extensible (and the complete lack of
comments in the patch isn't helping). Isn't it sufficient to check that
the index is unique/immediate/allnotnull and its ordering is a prefix
of query_pathkeys? If not, what's the rationale for the specific tests
being made on the pathkeys --- this code doesn't make much sense to me.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joseph Kregloh | 2013-12-31 21:31:02 | Re: pg_upgrade & tablespaces |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2013-12-31 20:57:20 | Re: pg_upgrade & tablespaces |