2014-12-15 11:06 GMT+07:00 Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com>: > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Ali Akbar <the.ap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2014-12-15 10:19 GMT+07:00 Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Ali Akbar <the.ap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Peter, while reviewing the better performing patch myself, now i think > >> > the > >> > patch needs more work to be committed. The structuring of the method > >> > will be > >> > confusing in the long term. I think I'll restructure the patch in the > >> > next > >> > commitfest. > >> > So i propose to break the patch: > >> > 1. We apply the current patch which uses xmlNodeCopy, so that the > >> > long-standing bug will be fixed in postgres. > >> > 2. I'll work with the performance enhancement in the next commitfest. > >> > > >> > Maybe for (2), the current better-performing patch can be viewed as > PoC > >> > of > >> > the expected performance. > >> > >> Ali, are you currently working on that? Would you mind re-creating new > >> entries in the commit fest app for the new set of patches that you are > >> planning to do? > >> For now I am switching this patch as returned with feedback. > >> Thanks, > > > > > > What i mean, the last patch (v7 patch) as it is is enough to fix the bug > > (nested xpath namespace problem). I think the performance regression is > > still acceptable (in my case it's ~20%), because the bug is severe. > > Currently, xpath can return invalid xml because the namespace isn't > included > > in the output! > > > > What i'll be working is the v4 patch, because it turns out the v4 patch > has > > better performance (~10%, but Peter's test shows it isn't the case). But, > > the problem is the v4 patch is organized wrongly, and hacks around the > > libxml's xml node structure (duplicating the namespace on the existing > > structure). I'll work on that, but it will affects the performance > benefit. > > > > So what i propose is, we close the longstanding bug in this comitfest > with > > the v7 patch. I'll work on improving the performance, without > compromising > > good code structure. If the result is good, i'll submit the patch. > OK. Could you then move this patch to the new CF with Needs Review > with Peter as reviewer then? He seems to be looking at it anyway > seeing the update from 12/11. >
OK. Moved to the new CF. Regards, -- Ali Akbar
