> On 27 Jul 2018, at 21:12, Alexander Kuzmenkov <a.kuzmen...@postgrespro.ru> > wrote:
> Thanks for the update. Thank you for reviewing and hacking! > On 07/25/2018 01:37 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> >>> Hmm, this is missing the eqop fields of SortGroupClause. I haven't >>> tested yet but does the similar degradation happen if two >>> SortGroupCaluses have different eqop and the same other values? >> I wasn’t able to construct a case showing this, but I also think you’re >> right. >> Do you have an idea of a query that can trigger a regression? The attached >> patch adds a stab at this, but I’m not sure if it’s the right approach. > > To trigger that, in your test example you could order by empno::int8 for one > window, and by empno::int2 for another. But don't I think you have to compare > eqop here, because if eqop differs, sortop will differ too. I removed the > comparison from the patch. Right, that makes sense. > I also clarified (I hope) the comments, and did the optimization I mentioned > earlier: using array instead of list for active clauses. Please see the > attached v6. Thanks, looks good. > Otherwise I think the patch is good. Cool, thanks for reviewing! cheers ./daniel
