Re: Re: GIST question
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: GIST question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14043.989964530@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: GIST question (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: GIST question
Re: Re: GIST question |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > I will keep the patch for a day and apply it if no one objects. I object. You still have no idea what that test is for or whether there may be any value in keeping it. It seems clear that the original GIST authors thought the flag was useful. I should also point out that the fact that the flag is always "true" today is because I ripped out some code in index.c a version or three back. 6.5 had indexForm->indhaskeytype = 0; while (attributeList != NIL) { IndexKey = (IndexElem *) lfirst(attributeList); if (IndexKey->typename != NULL) { indexForm->indhaskeytype = 1; break; } attributeList = lnext(attributeList); } which I removed because it was a security hole (you could tell the system to treat any data type as any other datatype, with obvious possibilities for coredump). But I didn't look hard at what the GIST code was using the flag for... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: