| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrey Borodin <borodin(at)octonica(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, amborodin(at)acm(dot)org, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Sergey Mirvoda <sergey(at)mirvoda(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: GiST optimizing memmoves in gistplacetopage for fixed-size updates [PoC] |
| Date: | 2016-09-09 11:57:12 |
| Message-ID: | 2856.1473422232@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrey Borodin <borodin(at)octonica(dot)com> writes:
> That storage assertion fired during usual update table set x=random() without conditions. Also Make check fails without it (for brin usage, gist is ok with it).
I'm confused by that assertion, because the patch-as-submitted didn't
touch BRIN. Based on Alvaro's comments, yes it would fail if we'd
modified BRIN to use this function ... but we hadn't yet.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2016-09-09 12:01:06 | Re: Tuplesort merge pre-reading |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2016-09-09 11:55:40 | Re: Tuplesort merge pre-reading |