| From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Corrupted btree index on HEAD because of covering indexes |
| Date: | 2018-04-24 16:06:44 |
| Message-ID: | 397775d0-103d-e67b-33f5-1190179aeafa@sigaev.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Perfect! I would like to commit it but have some suggestions:
1)
TRUNCATE bttest_multi;
INSERT INTO bttest_multi SELECT i, i%2 FROM generate_series(1, 100000) as i;
SELECT bt_index_parent_check('bttest_multi_idx', true);
to improve test stability it would be better to disable autovacuum:
ALTER TABLE bttest_multi SET (autovacuum_enabled = false)
2) Pls, add to test DELETE as it done in 6db4b49986be3fe59a1f6ba6fabf9852864efc3e
3) It's not directly connected to this patch, but allocation of BtreeCheckState
is not needed, it could be allocated on stack.
4) Nevertheless, I suggest to use palloc0 (or memset(0)) for BtreeCheckState.
Now several fields of that structure could be not inited.
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Finnerty | 2018-04-24 16:07:11 | Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |
| Previous Message | Evan Carroll | 2018-04-24 15:59:14 | Re: Extending a bit string |