On 2016-09-29 20:14:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > >> On 2016-09-28 15:04:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >>> Andres already > >>> stated that he things working on btree-over-hash would be more > >>> beneficial than fixing hash, but at this point it seems like he's the > >>> only one who takes that position. > >> > >> Note that I did *NOT* take that position. I was saying that I think we > >> should evaluate whether that's not a better approach, doing some simple > >> performance comparisons. > > > > I, for one, agree with this position. > > Well, I, for one, find it frustrating. It seems pretty unhelpful to > bring this up only after the code has already been written.
I brought this up in person at pgcon too. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
