Re: [HACKERS] WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

17.01.2018 11:45, Andrey Borodin:
> Hi!
>> 16 янв. 2018 г., в 21:50, Anastasia Lubennikova  написал(а):
>>
>> Updated patches are attached.
>>
> Cool, thanks!
>
> I've looked into the code, but haven't found anything broken.
> Since I've tried to rebase patch myself and failed on parse utils, I've spend some cycles trying to break parsing.
> One minor complain (no need to fix).
> This is fine
> x4mmm=# create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid,filler,upper(filler));
> ERROR:  expressions are not supported in included columns
> But why not same error here? Previous message is very descriptive.
> x4mmm=# create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid,filler,aid+1);
> ERROR:  syntax error at or near "+"
> This works. But should not, IMHO
> x4mmm=# create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid,aid,aid);
> CREATE INDEX
> Do not know what's that...
> # create index on pgbench_accounts (bid) include (aid desc, aid asc);
> CREATE INDEX
>
> All these things allow foot-shooting with a small caliber, but do not break big things.
>
> Unfortunately, amcheck_next does not work currently on HEAD (there are problems with AllocSetContextCreate() signature), but I've tested bt_index_check() before, during and after pgbench, on primary and on slave. Also, I've checked bt_index_parent_check() on master.

What is amcheck_next ?
> During bt_index_check()  test from time to time I was observing
> ERROR:  canceling statement due to conflict with recovery
> DETAIL:  User query might have needed to see row versions that must be removed.
>

Sorry, I forgot  to attach the amcheck fix to the previous message.
Now all the patches are in attachment.
Could you recheck if the error is still there?



-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company