Implementation of Table Index Engine using sortedcontainers #7531
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an initial implementation of a table index engine using sortedcontainers. It does not pass all tests. It's entirely based on the FastRBT engine in bst.py. My thought for moving forward would be to introduce a new engine like SortedArray and then deprecate the old engines based on bintrees.
Using the bintrees design, I replaced
bintrees.FastRBTree
withsortedcontainers.SortedDict
. The flaw here is thatSortedDict
requires that keys be hashable and theTime
object doesn't support hashing though it supports comparisons. Would it be too difficult to add hashing toTime
objects? Is that an unreasonable requirement for index table values?I'm also curious to better understand why values added to an index are sometimes converted to tuples and sometimes not. Why does
bst.py::FastBase.__init__
convert keys to tuples butbst.py::FastBase.add
does not?Reference: Issue #6539.