| From: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Kuzmenkov <akuzmenkov(at)timescale(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Incorrect result of bitmap heap scan. |
| Date: | 2025-02-28 17:52:48 |
| Message-ID: | CAEze2Wg8sbYAtK9FDO-MV9tbdfWA-8AB-feq2qTMib0xSpfnwQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 at 18:46, Matthias van de Meent
<boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've rebased my earlier patch to fix some minor conflicts with the
> work done on bitmaps in December last year. I've also included Andres'
> cursor-based isolation test as 0002; which now passes.
Rebased again, now on top of head due to f7a8fc10.
> The patches for the back-branches didn't need updating, as those
> branches have not diverged enough for those patches to have gotten
> stale. They're still available in my initial mail over at [0].
Same again.
> Kind regards,
>
> Matthias van de Meent
> Neon (https://neon.tech)
>
> [0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEze2Wg1Q4gWzm9RZ0yXydm23Mj3iScu8LA__Zz3JJEgpnoGPQ%40mail.gmail.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0002-isolationtester-showing-broken-index-only-bitmap-.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.4 KB |
| v4-0001-Remove-HeapBitmapScan-s-skip_fetch-optimization.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-02-28 17:54:02 | Re: Trigger more frequent autovacuums of heavy insert tables |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-02-28 17:37:29 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |