Re: [HACKERS] discussion on proposed int8_ops patch

> > Applied, though there was some wrapping of the e-mail I had to clean 
> > up.
> > Your hash code looks fine, so I enabled it by removing the ifdef's.  
> > > Enclosed below I have a patch to allow a btree index on the int8 
> > > type.
> > > I would like some feedback on what the hash function for the int8 
> > > hash function in the ./backend/access/hash/hashfunc.c should return.
> > > Also, could someone (maybe Tomas Lockhart?) look-over the patch and 
> > > make sure the system table entries are correct?  I've tried to 
> > > research them as much as I could, but some of them are still not 
> > > clear to me.
> 
> *argh* I had responded to Ryan and the list that there were problems
> with the patch and that I would fix it up and then apply to the tree.
> So don't expect this stuff to work as-is, and now I'll have to figure
> out what else has changed :(

Sorry.  I don't remember seeing your comments.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026