Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoZ-nnqkUF_hV-jNXC93K2cr4LD2WX_VqL8LeqA7c10Cpg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Ответы Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 11:44:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
>> > I think that those are objectively very large reductions in a cost
>> > that figures prominently in most workloads. Based solely on those
>> > facts, but also on the fairly low complexity of the patch, it may be
>> > worth considering committing this before 9.4 goes into feature freeze,
>>
>> Personally, I have paid no attention to this thread and have no intention
>> of doing so before feature freeze.  There are three dozen patches at
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view?id=21
>> that have moral priority for consideration for 9.4.  Not all of them are
>> going to get in, certainly, and I'm already feeling a lot of guilt about
>> the small amount of time I've been able to devote to reviewing/committing
>> patches this cycle.  Spending time now on patches that didn't even exist
>> at the submission deadline feels quite unfair to me.
>>
>> Perhaps I shouldn't lay my own guilt trip on other committers --- but
>> I think it would be a bad precedent to not deal with the existing patch
>> queue first.
>
> +1

+1

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: GSOC13 proposal - extend RETURNING syntax
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Using indices for UNION.