| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com, markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SSI patch version 14 |
| Date: | 2011-02-04 15:32:59 |
| Message-ID: | 4D4C1C2B.2030806@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.02.2011 14:30, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> The assertion in RecordFreeIndexPage() is a reasonable sanity
>> check, but I'm inclined to move it to the caller instead: I don't
>> think the FSM should need to access predicate lock manager, even
>> for an assertion.
>
> OK. So it looks like right now it will move to btvacuumpage(), right
> before the call to RecordFreeIndexPage(), and we will need to add it
> to one spot each in the GiST and GIN AMs, when we get to those.
> Would you like me to do that?
Yeah, please do. Thanks!
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-04 15:41:04 | Re: Does auto-analyze work on dirty writes? (was: Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again...) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-02-04 15:29:09 | CommitFest progress - or lack thereof |