On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You're welcome.  After some study and experimentation, I've committed
>> the other part also.
> Fantastic. I guess the precedent of the 9.5 text equality fast path
> made this discussion way smoother than last time, since essentially
> the same principle applies.

I think that is true.  I spent some time thinking about whether the
way you used INT_MIN as a sentinel value should be changed around
somehow, but ultimately I decided that it wasn't too bad and that
suggesting something else would be pointless kibitzing.  I also tried
to think of scenarios in which this would lose, and I'm not totally
convinced that there aren't any, but I'm convinced that, if they
exist, I don't know what they are.  Since the patch did deliver a
small improvement on my test cases and on yours, I think we might as
well have it in the tree.  If some pathological scenario shows up
where it turns out to hurt, we can always fix it then, or revert if it
need be.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to