Commit Graph

16 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Alexander Korotkov 8d51d7f403 Use C99 designator in the rbtree sentinel definition
This change should improve the code readability.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAGRrpzYE8-7GCoaPjOiL9T_HY605MRax-2jgTtLq236uksZ1Sw%40mail.gmail.com
Author: Steve Chavez, Alexander Korotkov
Reviewed-by: Alexander Korotkov
2022-07-08 22:00:03 +03:00
Bruce Momjian 27b77ecf9f Update copyright for 2022
Backpatch-through: 10
2022-01-07 19:04:57 -05:00
Bruce Momjian ca3b37487b Update copyright for 2021
Backpatch-through: 9.5
2021-01-02 13:06:25 -05:00
Bruce Momjian 7559d8ebfa Update copyrights for 2020
Backpatch-through: update all files in master, backpatch legal files through 9.4
2020-01-01 12:21:45 -05:00
Bruce Momjian 97c39498e5 Update copyright for 2019
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.4
2019-01-02 12:44:25 -05:00
Tom Lane 003c68a3b4 Rename rbtree.c functions to use "rbt" prefix not "rb" prefix.
The "rb" prefix is used by Ruby, so that our existing code results
in name collisions that break plruby.  We discussed ways to prevent
that by adjusting dynamic linker options, but it seems that at best
we'd move the pain to other cases.  Renaming to avoid the collision
is the only portable fix anyway.  Fortunately, our rbtree code is
not (yet?) widely used --- in core, there's only a single usage
in GIN --- so it seems likely that we can get away with a rename.

I chose to do this basically as s/rb/rbt/g, except for places where
there already was a "t" after "rb".  The patch could have been made
smaller by only touching linker-visible symbols, but it would have
resulted in oddly inconsistent-looking code.  Better to make it look
like "rbt" was the plan all along.

Back-patch to v10.  The rbtree.c code exists back to 9.5, but
rb_iterate() which is the actual immediate source of pain was added
in v10, so it seems like changing the names before that would have
more risk than benefit.

Per report from Pavel Raiskup.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/4738198.8KVIIDhgEB@nb.usersys.redhat.com
2018-11-06 13:25:24 -05:00
Bruce Momjian 9d4649ca49 Update copyright for 2018
Backpatch-through: certain files through 9.3
2018-01-02 23:30:12 -05:00
Tom Lane f80e782a6b Remove pre-order and post-order traversal logic for red-black trees.
This code isn't used, and there's no clear reason why anybody would ever
want to use it.  These traversal mechanisms don't yield a visitation order
that is semantically meaningful for any external purpose, nor are they
any faster or simpler than the left-to-right or right-to-left traversals.
(In fact, some rough testing suggests they are slower :-(.)  Moreover,
these mechanisms are impossible to test in any arm's-length fashion; doing
so requires knowledge of the red-black tree's internal implementation.
Hence, let's just jettison them.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17735.1505003111@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-09-10 13:19:11 -04:00
Tom Lane e3860ffa4d Initial pgindent run with pg_bsd_indent version 2.0.
The new indent version includes numerous fixes thanks to Piotr Stefaniak.
The main changes visible in this commit are:

* Nicer formatting of function-pointer declarations.
* No longer unexpectedly removes spaces in expressions using casts,
  sizeof, or offsetof.
* No longer wants to add a space in "struct structname *varname", as
  well as some similar cases for const- or volatile-qualified pointers.
* Declarations using PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY are formatted more nicely.
* Fixes bug where comments following declarations were sometimes placed
  with no space separating them from the code.
* Fixes some odd decisions for comments following case labels.
* Fixes some cases where comments following code were indented to less
  than the expected column 33.

On the less good side, it now tends to put more whitespace around typedef
names that are not listed in typedefs.list.  This might encourage us to
put more effort into typedef name collection; it's not really a bug in
indent itself.

There are more changes coming after this round, having to do with comment
indentation and alignment of lines appearing within parentheses.  I wanted
to limit the size of the diffs to something that could be reviewed without
one's eyes completely glazing over, so it seemed better to split up the
changes as much as practical.

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
2017-06-21 14:39:04 -04:00
Bruce Momjian a6fd7b7a5f Post-PG 10 beta1 pgindent run
perltidy run not included.
2017-05-17 16:31:56 -04:00
Bruce Momjian 1d25779284 Update copyright via script for 2017 2017-01-03 13:48:53 -05:00
Heikki Linnakangas e21db14b8a Clarify the new Red-Black post-order traversal code a bit.
Coverity complained about the for(;;) loop, because it never actually
iterated. It was used just to be able to use "break" to exit it early. I
agree with Coverity, that's a bit confusing, so refactor the code to
use if-else instead.

While we're at it, use a local variable to hold the "current" node. That's
shorter and clearer than referring to "iter->last_visited" all the time.
2016-09-04 15:02:06 +03:00
Heikki Linnakangas 9f85784cae Support multiple iterators in the Red-Black Tree implementation.
While we don't need multiple iterators at the moment, the interface is
nicer and less dangerous this way.

Aleksander Alekseev, with some changes by me.
2016-09-02 08:39:39 +03:00
Bruce Momjian ee94300446 Update copyright for 2016
Backpatch certain files through 9.1
2016-01-02 13:33:40 -05:00
Bruce Momjian 4baaf863ec Update copyright for 2015
Backpatch certain files through 9.0
2015-01-06 11:43:47 -05:00
Heikki Linnakangas 955557ddcc Move rbtree.c from src/backend/utils/misc to src/backend/lib.
We have other general-purpose data structures in src/backend/lib, so it
seems like a better home for the red-black tree as well.
2014-12-22 17:52:08 +02:00