| From: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bt_index_parent_check and concurrently build indexes |
| Date: | 2024-12-15 17:41:37 |
| Message-ID: | DAED842D-7AF8-447D-9411-5F1DBF9252B0@yandex-team.ru |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 13 Dec 2024, at 04:59, Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> <v3-0001-amcheck-Fix-bt_index_parent_check-behavior-with-C.patch>
+# Copyright (c) 2021-2024, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
I think usually write only commit year. Something tells me you can safely write 2025 there.
+Test::More->builder->todo_start('filesystem bug')
+ if PostgreSQL::Test::Utils::has_wal_read_bug;
Can't wrap my head why do you need this?
+# it fails, because it is expect to find the deleted row in index
I think this comment describes behavior before the fix in present tense.
- if (snapshot != SnapshotAny)
- UnregisterSnapshot(snapshot);
Snapshot business seems incorrect to me here...
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michail Nikolaev | 2024-12-15 17:43:35 | Re: Windows UTF8 system locale |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-12-15 16:15:23 | Re: pg_attribute_noreturn(), MSVC, C11 |