Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: _penalty gist method invoked with one key NULL

From: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: _penalty gist method invoked with one key NULL
Date: 2005-10-27 23:14:28
Message-ID: A7019C5C-400E-4783-8569-286E9B8C1509@pointblue.com.pl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Seems like decompress and compress were offending here, simply  
removing them from gist index create helped.
But, I still get on explain analyze that seqscan was used, rather  
than gist. Even tho ~ operator is defined for gist, and that seqscan  
is set to false.

On 2005-10-28, at 00:24, gj wrote:

>
>
> Breakpoint 1, gistpenalty (giststate=0xbfc254e4, attno=0,  
> key1=0xbfc252d4,
> isNull1=0 '\0', key2=0xbfc24fd4, isNull2=0 '\0',
>     penalty=0xbfc24fb0) at gistutil.c:821
> 821                     FunctionCall3(&giststate->penaltyFn[attno],
> (gdb) p key1
> $1 = (GISTENTRY *) 0xbfc252d4
> (gdb) p key1->key
> $2 = 0
> (gdb) p key2->key
> $3 = 138721324
>
>
> Sorry, key1 and key2 are just GISTENTRY pointers.
> so, as I can see this is NULL indeed, so my _penalty function is ok.
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of  
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that  
> your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2005-10-27 23:17:16
Subject: Re: enums
Previous:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2005-10-27 23:04:48
Subject: Re: enums

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group