Re: Re: GIST question

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I will keep the patch for a day and apply it if no one objects.
>
> I object. You still have no idea what that test is for or whether
> there may be any value in keeping it. It seems clear that the original
> GIST authors thought the flag was useful.
>
> I should also point out that the fact that the flag is always "true"
> today is because I ripped out some code in index.c a version or three
> back. 6.5 had
>
> indexForm->indhaskeytype = 0;
> while (attributeList != NIL)
> {
> IndexKey = (IndexElem *) lfirst(attributeList);
> if (IndexKey->typename != NULL)
> {
> indexForm->indhaskeytype = 1;
> break;
> }
> attributeList = lnext(attributeList);
> }
>
> which I removed because it was a security hole (you could tell the
> system to treat any data type as any other datatype, with obvious
> possibilities for coredump). But I didn't look hard at what the
> GIST code was using the flag for...

OK, I think it makes sense now. When you over-rode the type, it would
not use the system tables for byvalue and for compression/decompression.

Now, Tom, if you disabled such over-riding, seems the tests are useless
now, right?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026