| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes. |
| Date: | 2018-04-19 06:13:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wz=Zf70fUPco1RhtELAAJ=wOe6BhVjGNsyTn1pZ3XocJqw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:47 PM, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> wrote:
> Thank you, pushed.
Thanks.
I saw another preexisting issue, this time one that has been around
since 2007. Commit bc292937 forgot to remove a comment above
_bt_insertonpg() (the 'afteritem' stuff ended up being moved to the
bottom of _bt_findinsertloc(), where it remains today). The attached
patch fixes this, and in passing mentions the fact that
_bt_insertonpg() only performs retail insertions, and specifically
never inserts high key items.
I don't think it's necessary to add something about negative infinity
items to the same comment block. While it's true that _bt_insertonpg()
cannot truncate downlinks to make new minus infinity items, I see that
as a narrower issue.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Adjust-_bt_insertonpg-comments.patch | text/x-patch | 2.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-04-19 06:20:33 | Re: Excessive PostmasterIsAlive calls slow down WAL redo |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-04-19 06:10:42 | Re: Is there a memory leak in commit 8561e48? |