On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 9:37 PM Miroslav Bendik <miroslav.ben...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thanks for this fix. Now the version
> am_orderbyop_incremental_sort_v3.1.patch [1] works without issues
> using the master branch.
The v3.1 patch looks good to me, except that the comments around
match_pathkeys_to_index still need some polish.
1. For comment "On success, the result list is ordered by pathkeys.", I
think it'd be more accurate if we say something like "On success, the
result list is ordered by pathkeys or a prefix list of pathkeys."
considering the possibility of incremental sort.
2. The comment below is not true anymore.
/*
* Note: for any failure to match, we just return NIL immediately.
* There is no value in matching just some of the pathkeys.
*/
We should either remove it or change it to emphasize that we may return
a prefix of the pathkeys for incremental sort.
BTW, would you please add the patch to the CF to not lose track of it?
Thanks
Richard
