Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Tatsuhito Kasahara <kasahara(dot)tatsuhito(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes
Date: 2008-03-21 03:11:39
Message-ID: 12185.1206069099@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Hmm, this followup patch is wrong though -- the SQL definition is still
> using BIGINT where it should be using double. And the other changes to
> use BIGINT where the original values were int4 seem unnecessary.

I'm on this one now ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-03-21 03:24:45 Re: Fix pgstatindex using for large indexes
Previous Message Brendan Jurd 2008-03-21 03:02:39 Re: [PATCHES] [GENERAL] Empty arrays with ARRAY[]