Re: GIST and TOAST
| От | Andrew - Supernews |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: GIST and TOAST |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | slrneugunb.2tne.andrew+nonews@atlantis.supernews.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | GIST and TOAST (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: GIST and TOAST
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2007-03-02, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com> writes: >> On 2007-03-02, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> I think these are actual bugs. If you happened to provide a large enough >>> datum >>> to the gist code it would cause the same problem I'm seeing. The packed >>> varlena patch just makes it easier to trigger. > >> Are you taking into account the fact that, at least prior to your patch, >> values in index tuples could never be toasted? > > False --- see index_form_tuple(). My mistake. A closer reading, however, shows that at least for cases like intarray, btree_gist, etc., the detoasting of an index value is being done in the gist decompress function, so the value seen via GISTENTRY in the other functions should already have been detoasted once. -- Andrew, Supernews http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: