From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: brin regression test intermittent failures |
Date: | 2015-06-04 17:24:51 |
Message-ID: | 20150604172451.GJ133018@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I think it would be a good idea to extend the brinopers table to include
> > the number of expected matches, and to complain if that's not what we got,
> > rather than simply checking for zero.
>
> Also, further experimentation shows that there are about 30 entries in the
> brinopers table that give rise to seqscan plans even when we're commanding
> a bitmap scan, presumably because those operators aren't brin-indexable.
> They're not the problematic cases, but things like
>
> ((charcol)::text > 'A'::text)
>
> Is there a reason to have such things in the table, or is this just a
> thinko? Or is it actually a bug that we're getting such plans?
No, I left those there knowing that there are no plans involving brin --
in a way, they provide some future proofing if some of those operators
are made indexable later.
I couldn't think of a way to test that the plans are actually using the
brin index or not, but if we can do that in some way, that would be
good.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2015-06-04 17:26:00 | Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-06-04 17:17:30 | Re: brin regression test intermittent failures |