Re: Index-only scans for GiST.

Thanks for answer.
Now it seems to be applied correctly.

2015-02-12 3:12 GMT+04:00 Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>:

> On 11 February 2015 at 22:50, Anastasia Lubennikova <
> lubennikovaav(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Finally there is a new version of patch (in attachments).
>> It provides multicolumn index-only scan for GiST indexes.
>>
>> - Memory leak is fixed.
>> - little code cleanup
>> - example of performance test in attachmens
>> - function OIDs have debugging values (1111*) just to avoid merge
>> conflicts while testing patch
>>
>> Wiki page of the project is
>>
>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Support_for_Index-only_scans_for_GIST_GSoC_2014
>>
>> Waiting for feedback.
>>
>
> Hi Anastasia. Thanks for the updated patch. I've just tried applying it
> to head and it doesn't appear to apply cleanly.
>
> $ patch -p1 < ~/Downloads/indexonlyscan_gist_2.0.patch
> (Stripping trailing CRs from patch; use --binary to disable.)
> patching file src/backend/access/gist/gist.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1404 (offset 9 lines).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 1434 (offset 9 lines).
> (Stripping trailing CRs from patch; use --binary to disable.)
> patching file src/backend/access/gist/gistget.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 227 (offset 1 line).
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 243 (offset 1 line).
> Hunk #3 succeeded at 293 (offset -4 lines).
> Hunk #4 succeeded at 330 (offset -4 lines).
> Hunk #5 succeeded at 365 (offset -5 lines).
> Hunk #6 succeeded at 444 (offset -27 lines).
> Hunk #7 succeeded at 474 (offset -27 lines).
> Hunk #8 FAILED at 518.
> Hunk #9 succeeded at 507 (offset -28 lines).
> Hunk #10 succeeded at 549 with fuzz 1 (offset -28 lines).
> Hunk #11 FAILED at 601.
> 2 out of 11 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
> src/backend/access/gist/gistget.c.rej
> ...
>
> --
> Thom
>

--
Best regards,
Lubennikova Anastasia