> In short: the error in Aleksander's argument is the assumption that
> shared hashtables have fixed size.  That's simply false.

Well this is a bit embarrassing but I have to admit that you are right.
Dynahash code is a bit non-trivial to say the least (let me guess -
there is no point of suggesting a patch that splits it into two or
three separate implementations for each use case, right? :) and I
misunderstood how it actually works. My apologies.

Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

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

Reply via email to