From: | Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp |
Cc: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] A patch for FATAL 1:btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected |
Date: | 1999-04-26 06:57:03 |
Message-ID: | 37240E3F.DE828E0E@krs.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> Any objection to the pacthes below? Seems they solve problems
> reported by a user in Japan (both on 6.4.2 and current).
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
>
> >From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
> >To: "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
> >Subject: [HACKERS] A patch for FATAL 1:btree: BTP_CHAIN flag was expected
> >Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:00:57 +0900
> >Message-ID: <000801be8594$869ad2a0$2801007e(at)cadzone(dot)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
>
> >Hello all,
> >
> >There exists the bug that causes elog() FATAL 1:btree:
> >BTP_CHAIN flag was expected.
> >The following patch would solve the bug partially.
> >
> >It seems that the bug is caused by _bt_split() in nbtinsert.c.
> >BTP_CHAIN flags of buf/rbuf are always off immediately after
> >_bt_split(),so the pages may be in inconsistent state.
> >Though the flags are chagned correctly before _bt_relbuf(),
> >buf/rbuf are not _bt_wrt(norel)buf()'d after the change
> >(buf/rbuf are already _bt_wrtnorelbuf()'d in _bt_split() ).
> >
Let me check it...
I'll commit it myself...
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-04-26 06:57:27 | Re: [HACKERS] create view as select distinct (fwd) |
Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 1999-04-26 04:47:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Cygwin32 fix for current |