On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> * We're going to want to expose PrepareSortSupportComparisonShim >>> for use outside tuplesort.c too, and possibly refactor >>> tuplesort_begin_heap so that the SortKey setup logic inside it >>> can be extracted for use elsewhere. Shall we just add those to >>> tuplesort's API, or would it be better to create a sortsupport.c >>> with these sorts of functions? > >> Why are we going to want to do that? If it's because there are other >> places in the code that can make use of a fast comparator that don't >> go through tuplesort.c, then we should probably break it off into a >> separate file (sortkey.c?). But if it's because we think that clients >> of the tuplesort code are going to need it for some reason, then we >> may as well keep it in tuplesort.c. > > My expectation is that nbtree, as well as mergejoin and mergeappend, > would get converted over to use the fast comparator API. I looked at > that a little bit but didn't push it far enough to be very sure about > whether they'd be able to share the initialization code from > tuplesort_begin_heap. But they're definitely going to need the shim > function for backwards compatibility, and > PrepareSortSupportComparisonShim was my first cut at a wrapper that > would be generally useful.
OK. Well, then pushing it out to a separate file probably makes sense. Do you want to do that or shall I have a crack at it? If the latter, what do you think about using the name SortKey for everything rather than SortSupport? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
