On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 8:42 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can't we think of comparing at the block level, like we can compare
> each block but ignore the content of the hole?
We could do that, but I don't think that's a full solution. I think
I'd end up having to reimplement the equivalent of heap_mask,
btree_mask, et. al. in Perl, which doesn't seem very reasonable. It's
fairly complicated logic even written in C, and doing the right thing
in Perl would be more complex, I think, because it wouldn't have
access to all the same #defines which depend on things like word size
and Endianness and stuff. If we want to allow this sort of comparison,
I feel we should think of changing the C code in some way to make it
work reliably rather than try to paper over the problems in Perl.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com