Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.
Дата
Msg-id CAH2-Wz=Zf70fUPco1RhtELAAJ=wOe6BhVjGNsyTn1pZ3XocJqw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.  (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>)
Ответы Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.  (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:47 PM, Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> wrote:
> Thank you, pushed.

Thanks.

I saw another preexisting issue, this time one that has been around
since 2007. Commit bc292937 forgot to remove a comment above
_bt_insertonpg() (the 'afteritem' stuff ended up being moved to the
bottom of _bt_findinsertloc(), where it remains today). The attached
patch fixes this, and in passing mentions the fact that
_bt_insertonpg() only performs retail insertions, and specifically
never inserts high key items.

I don't think it's necessary to add something about negative infinity
items to the same comment block. While it's true that _bt_insertonpg()
cannot truncate downlinks to make new minus infinity items, I see that
as a narrower issue.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Is there a memory leak in commit 8561e48?
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Excessive PostmasterIsAlive calls slow down WAL redo