Re: BUG #16619: Amcheck detects corruption in hstore' btree index (ver 2)
От | Alexander Korotkov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #16619: Amcheck detects corruption in hstore' btree index (ver 2) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPpHfduwMnf+mRuSHo7LgcMu_FciAK+2LWCB4wwfEBhPW=kzjQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #16619: Amcheck detects corruption in hstore' btree index (ver 2) (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #16619: Amcheck detects corruption in hstore' btree index (ver 2)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, Peter! On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:47 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 7:24 AM Anastasia Lubennikova > <a.lubennikova@postgrespro.ru> wrote: > > For v2 indexes pivot tuple's offset can contain any random number which > > will lead to bt_pivot_tuple_identical() failure. > > > > The fix is pretty simple - only compare data part of the tuples. I think > > we can skip offnum check for all index versions to keep the code simple. > > I pushed a tweaked version of this patch. It seemed worth preserving > the inclusion of offset number in the bt_pivot_tuple_identical() > memcmp() comparison. The field contains important metadata that really > should match. Also, I made sure to compare t_info field on all indexes > (including pg_upgrade'd indexes) for the same reason. > > We already account for heapkeyspace difference in other similar > routines, such as invariant_l_offset(). It's not hard to do this here > as well. I was going to tweak this patch in a similar way, but made it in advance. Your commit looks good to me, thanks! ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: