Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1352058108.6292.13.camel@jdavis-laptop обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree
Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 12:47 +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Right version of patch is attached. > * In bounds_adjacent, there's no reason to flip the labels back. * Comment should indicate more explicitly that bounds_adjacent is sensitive to the argument order. * In bounds_adjacent, it appears that "bound1" corresponds to "B" in the comment above, and "bound2" corresponds to "A" in the comment above. I would have guessed from reading the comment that bound1 corresponded to A. We should just use consistent names between the comment and the code (e.g. boundA and boundB). * I could be getting confused, but I think that line 645 of rangetypes_spgist.c should be inverted (!bounds_adjacent(...)). * I think needPrevious should have an explanatory comment somewhere. It looks like you are using it to store some state as you descend the tree, but it doesn't look like it's used to reconstruct the value (because we already have the value anyway). Since it's being used for a purpose other than what's intended, that should be explained. Regards,Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: