Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 2:44 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> After trying it (against yesterday's sources) on my SELinux-capable
>> machine, I see no evidence that we need any output ordering changes
>> at all if we go this route. This is probably unsurprising considering
>> that the old btree code used to provide mostly-reverse-insertion-order
>> scan order.
> That's good. I'm trying to fix it by hand right now, in the way that
> Andres suggested. It is both tedious and error-prone.
Yeah. Don't do that.
After further thought I think I'll go with the alternate solution
(separate sortObjectAddresses function) as that could possibly have
other uses, and removing the "const" from performMultipleDeletions
seems a bit bletcherous. Will push a fix in a few minutes.
regards, tom lane
