Re: AW: AW: BUG #18147: ERROR: invalid perminfoindex 0 in RTE with relid xxxxx
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: AW: AW: BUG #18147: ERROR: invalid perminfoindex 0 in RTE with relid xxxxx |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-WzkYBZ8qCsMs8i3BuKFLXO2UGKLiB+hhQZDC7=3Y+yf1pA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: AW: AW: BUG #18147: ERROR: invalid perminfoindex 0 in RTE with relid xxxxx (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: AW: AW: BUG #18147: ERROR: invalid perminfoindex 0 in RTE with relid xxxxx
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 5:28 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Separately, I wonder if index_unchanged_by_update should actually just > > always give the hint with a non-HOT update, regardless of the > > specifics for each index/its columns -- just like on the v14 branch. > > I'm confused. Wouldn't that be the exact opposite of "unchanged"? Well, in practice "indexUnchanged = true" means "do bottom-up deletion if it's the only way to avoid a page split". The justification is that the incoming tuple is "logically unchanged" (actually it's more complicated than that, but that's our starting point). Maybe that naming convention makes things more confusing than necessary. Naming things is hard. > Maybe the real problem here is that the meaning of the hint is not > what you'd expect from its name? Maybe. Perhaps I should have chosen a name that made it clearer that there really is only one way to apply "indexUnchanged = true". Though the docs are pretty clear about this already. I can't say I feel too strongly about the name myself. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: