| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses |
| Date: | 2014-06-05 02:07:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTFzWC34JU4MtQMJj6jKDX9tZ-bnH_A44HNxa8twVhh1w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 2014-05-09 22:14:25 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> [ patch ]
>
> I've committed a revised version of Andres' patch.
Thanks!
> I thought even that was kind of overkill; but a bigger problem is the
> output was sensitive to hash values which are not portable across
> different architectures. With a bit of experimentation I found that
> a SELECT DISTINCT ... ORDER BY query would exercise both hashing and
> sorting, so that's what got committed. (I'm not entirely sure though
> whether the plan will be stable across architectures; we might have
> to tweak the test case based on buildfarm feedback.)
Yeah this was a bit too much, and came up with some more light-weight
regression tests instead in the patch here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqSgZVrHRgsgUg63SCFY+AwH-=3JuDy7moq-_fo7Wi4++Q@mail.gmail.com
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2014-06-05 02:09:27 | Re: slotname vs slot_name |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-06-05 01:57:58 | Re: slotname vs slot_name |