Re: [PATCH] Check that index can return in get_actual_variable_range()
От | Aleksander Alekseev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Check that index can return in get_actual_variable_range() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJ7c6TM2nPjkW4bvnB7m+g_k6q5TT4KZQuxvQsXEAdGZJf8Pbg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [PATCH] Check that index can return in get_actual_variable_range() (Maxime Schoemans <maxime.schoemans@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Check that index can return in get_actual_variable_range()
Re: [PATCH] Check that index can return in get_actual_variable_range() |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Maxime, > Some recent changes were made to remove the explicit dependency on btree indexes in some parts of the code. One of thesechanges was made in commit 9ef1851685b, which allows non-btree indexes to be used in get_actual_variable_range(). Afollow-up commit ee1ae8b99f9 fixes the cases where an index doesn’t have a sortopfamily as this is a prerequisite to beused in get_actual_variable_range(). However, I found out recently that indices that have ‘amcanorder = true’ but do notallow index-only-scans (amcanreturn returns false or is NULL) will pass all of the conditions, while they should be rejectedsince get_actual_variable_range() uses the index-only-scan machinery in get_actual_variable_endpoint(). > > Attached is a small patch that adds a check in get_actual_variable_range() to reject indices that do not allow index-onlyscans. Thanks for the patch. Can you think of any test cases we can add to the code base? -- Best regards, Aleksander Alekseev
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: