From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree. |
Date: | 2020-03-01 19:42:07 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmAufHiOku6AGiFD=81VQs5nYJ1L2YkhW1t+BH4CMsgRw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers |
On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 11:29 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Hm. That would probably be enough to shut up Coverity, but I'm unsure
> whether it'd really be an improvement from the legibility and safety
> viewpoints.
I noticed that _bt_update_posting() behaves as if the origtuple might
not be a posting list tuple at the point that keysize is calculated,
despite generally depending on it being a posting list tuple (which it
asserts by way of its "_bt_posting_valid(origtuple)" assertion). The
final tuple might not be a posting list, but the original one must be
(if it isn't, then nbtree VACUUM should be deleting it outright in the
traditional way, rather than updating it). I should fix that, either
way.
> Do you want to try coding it that way and see what it
> comes out like?
Sure.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2020-03-01 20:12:18 | pgsql: Remove dead code from _bt_update_posting(). |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-03-01 19:29:37 | Re: pgsql: Add deduplication to nbtree. |