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

Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative
Date: 2011-05-31 23:57:24
Message-ID: BANLkTikAocc1fdEkggv-0-TYeVFm-1pt3w@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committerspgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Do gistchoose et al expect the triangle function to obey the triangle
>> inequality?
>
> Don't think so.
>

I guess it was obvious but that was "expect the *penalty* function to
obey the triangle inequality"

-- 
greg

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tatsuo IshiiDate: 2011-06-01 00:08:47
Subject: Any idea for serializing INSERTING SERIAL column?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-05-31 23:11:59
Subject: Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2011-06-01 03:19:16
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve corner cases in pg_ctl's new wait-for-postmaster-startup
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-05-31 23:11:59
Subject: Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative

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