| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: GIN logging GIN_SEGMENT_UNMODIFIED actions? |
| Date: | 2016-08-31 11:32:11 |
| Message-ID: | 6129.1472643131@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 12:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Hmm, comparing gin_desc() to ginRedoInsert() makes me think there are more
>> problems there than that one. Aren't the references to "payload" wrong
>> in all three branches of that "if" construct, not just the middle one?
> If we do this, the extra information like ginxlogInsertEntry->isDelete will
> never be reported when the record has FPW.
I'm happy to have it print whatever is there, but are you sure that the
information is even there? I thought that this chunk of the WAL record
would get optimized away if we write an FPW image instead.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-31 11:38:34 | Re: Use static inline functions for Float <-> Datum conversions |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-31 11:26:22 | Re: Comment on GatherPath.single_copy |