Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage
Дата
Msg-id CAB7nPqRrAjTt31zYV4NX1g=-KhttrhdKyiC=1=sS6K7QNEUNWQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Setting pd_lower in GIN metapage  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why do we need to change metapage at every place for btree ...

I have been hunting for some time places where meta buffers were
marked as dirtied and logged. So in the effort, I think that my hands
and mind got hotter, forgetting that pd_lower is set there for ages.
Of course feel free to ignore that.

> ... or hash?
> Any index that is upgraded should have pd_lower set, do you have any
> case in mind where it won't be set?  For hash, if someone upgrades
> from a version lower than 9.6, it might not have set, but we already
> give warning to reindex the hash indexes upgraded from a version lower
> than 10.

Ah yes. You do set pd_lower in 10 as well for hash... So that will be
fine. So remains SpGist as a slacking AM based on the current patches.
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Anthony Bykov
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-itemINTO list
Следующее
От: Dmitriy Sarafannikov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Allow GiST opcalsses without compress\decompres functions