Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.5 items

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.5 items
Date: 1999-06-04 03:03:03
Message-ID: 199906040303.XAA02586@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > SELECT * FROM test WHERE test IN (SELECT * FROM test) fails with strange error
>
> What is this one all about? I don't see a problem offhand:
>
> regression=> create table test (test int);
> CREATE
> regression=> SELECT * FROM test WHERE test IN (SELECT * FROM test);
> test
> ----
> (0 rows)

The issue is the issue:

test=> drop table test;
DROP
test=> create table test(x int);
CREATE
test=> insert into test values (3);
INSERT 72169 1
test=> select * from test where test in (select x from test);
NOTICE: unknown node tag 704 in fireRIRonSubselect()
NOTICE: Node is: { IDENT "test" }
ERROR: ExecEvalExpr: unknown expression type 704
test=>

> > Fix function pointer calls to take Datum args for char and int2 args(ecgs)
>
> I think the consensus is to leave this alone until we can get more info.

Yes. I will remove it.

>
> > Large Object memory problems
>
> As far as I can tell, lo_read/lo_write etc do not leak memory anymore
> (well, maybe they do within a transaction, but it's all cleaned up at
> xact end).
>
> There is a small leak every time a new LO is created, but I believe this
> is not specific to LOs --- I think it is the same leak in the relcache
> that occurs on the first reference to a relation of *any* kind. (See
> my message "Memory leaks in relcache" dated 5/15/99.)
>
> In short, I think this one can be closed out, or at least removed from
> the 6.5-release-stoppers list.

Removed.

> > refint problems
>
> What is the issue here?

I thought regression tests were showing a problem?

> > spinlock stuck problem
>
> I think this might be fixed... at least Vadim fixed one cause of it...

Anyone?

>
> > benchmark performance problem
>
> The only thing I have been able to find out here is that btree is fairly
> inefficient in the presence of *many* equal keys. I do not think this
> is a showstopper, although if I get time I might try to fix the easiest-
> to-fix aspect of it (linear search in bt_firsteq).

I will move it to TODO if it is not done for final.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-06-04 03:06:37 Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.5 items
Previous Message Vadim Mikheev 1999-06-04 02:56:04 Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6