Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Pushed with that change and some other mostly-cosmetic tweaking. Thank you for addressing all those issues, Tom! I tested some exclusion constraints that are interesting to me, and everything seems to be working well. --

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

I wrote: > I'm kind of inclined to change uuid_parts_distance to just convert > a given pg_uuid_t to "double" and then apply penalty_num(), as is > done in gbt_macad_penalty. Pushed with that change and some other mostly-cosmetic tweaking. One not too cosmetic fix was that gbt_uuid_union was

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

Chris Bandy writes: > [ btree_gist_uuid_8.patch ] Um ... is there a reason why the penalty logic in gbt_uuid_penalty() is completely unlike that for any other btree_gist module? As best I can tell from the (admittedly documentation-free) code elsewhere, the penalty ought

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > What I would suggest is that you forget the union hack and just use > memcmp in all the comparison functions. It's not likely to be worth > the trouble to try to get those calls to be safely aligned. The > only place where

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

Adam Brusselback writes: > [ btree_gist_uuid_7.patch ] I spent awhile looking at this. I have exactly no faith that it won't crash on alignment-picky hardware, because this declaration: union pg_uuid_t { unsigned char data[UUID_LEN]; uint64 v64[2]; };

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:49 AM, Adam Brusselback wrote: > So I apologize in advance if I didn't follow the processes exactly, I was > going to attempt to review this to move it along, but ran into issues > applying the patch cleanly to master. I fixed the issues I was

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

So I apologize in advance if I didn't follow the processes exactly, I was going to attempt to review this to move it along, but ran into issues applying the patch cleanly to master. I fixed the issues I was having applying it, and created a new patch (attached). Managed to test it out after I

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Paul A Jungwirth wrote: > This is my first patch, so my apologies if anything is missing. I went > the guidelines and I think I have everything covered. :-) I am moving this patch to next CF, removing Julien Rouhaud and Teodor

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

Paul A Jungwirth p...@illuminatedcomputing.com writes: I'm interested in adding GiST support for the UUID column type from the uuid-ossp extension. This has been requested and attempted before: I've used Postgres for a long time, but I've only dabbled a bit in the source code. So I'm curious

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Paul A Jungwirth p...@illuminatedcomputing.com writes: I'm interested in adding GiST support for the UUID column type . . . . So I'm curious where this change would go? btree_gist, I'd think Okay, thank you for your answer! I

Re: [HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

Paul A Jungwirth p...@illuminatedcomputing.com writes: On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Paul A Jungwirth p...@illuminatedcomputing.com writes: I'm interested in adding GiST support for the UUID column type . . . . So I'm curious where this change would go?

[HACKERS] GiST support for UUIDs

Hello, I'm interested in adding GiST support for the UUID column type from the uuid-ossp extension. This has been requested and attempted before: http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/83604/optimizing-postgres-row-overlap-constraints-involving-uuids-and-gist