Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 563.1585857846@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string ("Daniel Verite" <daniel@manitou-mail.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: A bug when use get_bit() function for a long bytea string
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Daniel Verite" <daniel@manitou-mail.org> writes: > These 2 tests need to allocate big chunks of contiguous memory, so they > might fail for lack of memory on tiny machines, and even when not failing, > they're pretty slow to run. Are they worth the trouble? Yeah, I'd noticed those on previous readings of the patch. They'd almost certainly fail on some of our older/smaller buildfarm members, so they're not getting committed, even if they didn't require multiple seconds apiece to run (even on a machine with plenty of memory). It's useful to have them for initial testing though. It'd be great if there was a way to test get_bit/set_bit on large indexes without materializing a couple of multi-hundred-MB objects. Can't think of one offhand though. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: