Andres Freund escribió: > On 2013-08-07 10:36:52 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Yeah, I guess in isolation this doesn't make that much sense. I am > > hesitant to create a third copy in the minmax patch, but I will do that > > for now and propose the refactoring later. > > Well, you didn't mention upthread that you want to do this because > you're going to need another variant of the same code. Imo that's > sufficient reasoning. Well, I would need to tweak the new code again, moving it from heaptuple.c to htup_details.h as a STATIC_IF_INLINE function; and furthermore I have noticed that if I modify the code in minmax, I can have it do one more thing that I would need to do outside of it anyway. (These tuples have two null bitmaps; I would have to decode the second one separately. Doing it inside the new "deform" variant is much easier.) -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
